Hello, >IMHO that adds another not very logical layer of complication for little >>gain. There's a nice "democratic" aspect to every aircraft being in a >>single central repository, and reduced opportunities for those "clique" >type >groups that so naturally spring up and are divisive and very >offputting to >new contributers coming to the project.
Sorry, I hate it to say, but we have that situation already. >Up until now it's been very straightforward to get a new model included - >if >it's your own work and under a suitable licence you simply ask someone >with >commit rights if you know one, or offer it to the dev list and it >goes in. >There's no embarrasment over which hangar / group / clique to >submit it to, >and I think that's a very good thing. So far it is working. BUT: Those who have commit rights are already busy with their own stuff. For a new aircraft it is o.k. to ask them- but when I want to update my work? For each small update asking and stealing time of those people? But the last sentence is not true again, sorry. It should be like that, but it isn't any more. The idea of Yves aka HB-GRAL is quite nice and seems to me to reflect the actual situation. But I must admit- in the whole thing I'm quite uncertain how to proceed. I just know that the current FGData make more and more problems with its size! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The demand for IT networking professionals continues to grow, and the demand for specialized networking skills is growing even more rapidly. Take a complimentary Learning@Cisco Self-Assessment and learn about Cisco certifications, training, and career opportunities. http://p.sf.net/sfu/cisco-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
