Hi Michael,

On 29 Sep 2011, at 08:44, Michael Sgier wrote:

> Durk: I've only seen some lone hangars with terrasync but no probably not all 
> as they are for 850 format. As HB-GRAL stated some airports are way off in 
> old 810 format, so using a custom start or tower view location from my 
> groundnetworks might put you anywhere. But I've even had a dispute with 
> Robin, so I've to check back 850 airport locations as soon as they're in git.

If you have committed apt.dat files, to robin peel than I think that we could 
consider committing your ground networks to the terrasync repository. We 
currently have already quite a few (if not most) ground networks  in the 
scenery that are based on future improvement of the scenery (in anticipation of 
the improved scenery generation process that Martin is putting a lot of effort 
into). So, if you have contributed new apt.dat info that would be used in this 
buidl process then it would be okay.  But, I suspect that your ground networks 
contain parking information only? I would rather see fully developed ground 
networks, that can also be used for AI purposes. 

So, in the end, I would recommend that instead of committing these data to the 
fgdata repository, you bundle them with your own scnery distribution instead 
(i.e. you in addition to the Terrain/ and Objects/ directories, you'd provide 
an additional Airports/ directory in your package. FlightGear 2.4.0 should be 
able to read the parking data when you include the new scenery folder in your 

All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to