Hi,
> This team should others as they wish to be
treated
An huge difference exist here : you haven't received insult. Helijah insult PAF
members !
PAF team and you are not in bad relation (AFAIK) : this difference is important.
All people need to know that 60% (or more... it's approximate) of aircraft
available for flightgear are created by helijah.
More than 80% of them are totaly crappy ! They aren't a good point for
FlightGear project !
Imagines
a man who don't know FlightGear project : he test 1, 2 ,3 aircrafts by
helijah then he says "pfff all these aircraft are unusable. I leave
FlightGear and I go buy MSFS !"
I'm really convinced the work made by helijah is bad for FlightGear project.
Aircrafts created by helijah aren't realist.
It will be good if FlightGear community take conscious of this !
A real example :
I
have invited a friend to download and test FG, after some days he says
me : pfff your simulator is very bad ! A lot of aircraft haven't real
instruments and are totally uncompleted !
I have asked him what aircrafts have he tested : CL415, Gee Bee, Katana, c172p,
Piper Cub
Helijah needs to stop to create 1 aircraft per week and needs to improve the
aircrafts already available !
It's
not a good point to say "FlightGear is the only simulator with more
than 400 airacrafts !" but in these 400 aircrafts a lot of aircrafts are
uncompleted and these uncomplete aircrafts are mainly created by
helijah.
The work made by helijah isn't a good ads for FlightGear project, I'm convinced
!
About the list of my friend, only Helijah's aircrafts was concerned by
the critics. As I found, FlightGear isn't ready to see the reality about
Helijah...
I continue to believe that Helijah doesn't create aircraft : he creates 3D
model, not an aircraft. The difference is huge...
An
aircraft has need electric system, fuel system, operating procedures,
radio... Helijah's aircraft haven't that, so I call this a 3D model, not
an aircraft. FlightGear is an aircraft simulator... not an exposition
software of 3D model...
But now I keep this opinion for me since nobody can heard/understand this
opinion
My opinion is also join by David :
> There's work enough for the next coming 10 years! Each, new
> I-don't-plann-to-finish-aircraft just make the whole FGFS project less
> competitive to other simulators.
Now I'm real impressive about this discussion. Why ? because many many answers
appear about this discussion.
And what ? It's very simple : I have create a discussion here :
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=28709446 and I haven't
received answer from devel list...
Other example : http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=28360748
and no answer from devel list
When I write mails to contribute to FlightGear : No answer from devel-list.
Just a little answer like "Ok Clément I see your mail but actually we are too
busy" would be sufficient. (This is not a criticism, just an observation)
But when I write a mail about fair practice : Many answer.
Now I continue to improve some parts... Rembrandt project, sceneries... And I
turn the page about this discussion ;)
Cheers,
Clément
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Virtualization & Cloud Management Using Capacity Planning
Cloud computing makes use of virtualization - but cloud computing
also focuses on allowing computing to be delivered as a service.
http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfnl/114/51521223/
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
