Hi Yves, The issue here is that some of these textures are really large, and thus have the potential to limit performance for users with lower-end machines. Thus, I'm interested in guidelines/policies regarding texturing the terrain, what sizes are recommended or usable etc. I also agree about about having a unified texture scheme (or more, to suit different tastes/seasons/regions).
Cheers, Adrian On Tuesday, November 22, 2011 14:23:09 HB-GRAL wrote: > Hi Adrian > > I think quality textures like yours goes directly to the main repo ? On > the other hand I heared there is probably central "scenery repo" coming > up (a separate repository and/or database). Maybe also for developing > textures and to store "origins" or base material ? > > Green as I am I started such a database once myself (landcovertex). But > without success, it needs to be close to the main project and at least > 2-3 people working there. Textures can go from there to the main repo > when texture "packs" are ready, when textures are classified and when > changes to materials.xml are applied. I might be wrong, but in my point > of view changing one single texture makes almost no sense for world > scenery. And Git, images, heavy blobs ! ... as you mentioned once > yourself, looking to texture blobs with git does not make a lot of > sense. Thats why I still propose a "texture developing database/gallery" > where main work is done, beside of a repository. > > Cheers, Yves ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. IT sense. And common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-novd2d _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
