Vivian: > I don't want to download fgdata/fg/sg to find that I have to spend > hours fixing up my work. I'd rather get on with my own stuff.
Your actions don't match your words. You're the remaining maintainer of the water effect in default. Its environment interface still doesn't support Advanced Weather. When you implemented it, it had zero communication with Advanced Weather, I had to spend hours to figure out how it gets light and wind info and then code a hack for Advanced Weather to make it work. If this is a real concern to you - there has been a long weekend to get busy and change the interface. Looking at GIT, you haven't done so and we're still using the incomplete hack. Any plans to change that in the near future? > I don't want to force developers to develop ac for one > scheme/framework rather than another. As pointed out for the 3rd time now, that is a hypothetical problem in ALS. Only Rembrandt requires separate Rembrandt and no Rembrandt versions of aircraft. Are you unable or unwilling to acknowledge that point? > I don't want to force users to choose between a nice atmospheric > effects or shadows, or anything else. I think I have said about 5 times now that I am perfectly willing to contribute to this, but I'm not doing it all on my own. I haven't seen you volunteer to help out here. I haven't seen you arguing with Fred that he should take care to help out. Somehow, it seems to be my fault. Also - you can burn framerate only once, and I have stated my opinion on that as well. My personal view is that OpenSource is about freedom, and freedom implies choice. It's nothing bad to deliver a rendering scheme for low end GPUs and one for high end GPUs and let the user pick, and I don't even see you acknowledging that argument. I acknowledge that we probably have a fundamental split of philosophy here: I see more merit in offering different choices to the user (think Linux with KDE or Gnome - I see myself well backed up by OpenSource tradition here) than in pre-selecting to the lowest common denominator we can all agree on so that the user doesn't have to choose. You see this differently, and we probably won't ever resolve this. Vivian, I don't see this getting any more constructive, and I don't have the impression that this is about me explaining to avoid a misunderstanding. I don't see my arguments acknowledged, much less refuted. I don't see you willing to take any action making the framework which you maintain accessible. So I will not justify the reasons behind what I do to you any further, and unless I see a constructive turn, I will also refrain from doing so in the future. Henri: > How could you say "you're both not even users of the scheme" ? > Yes i had at the beginning done some screenshots with the Dome project, > the period when i could use it without breaking others features. > I was, even, able to combine the Effects with the dome by unlocking the > conditions. To me the project was promising , until you engage to develop > deeply. As explained several times over, when the skydome used the default terrain shaders, it produced glaring graphical artefacts. What I have done is the only possible series of changes which could have fixed this. I'm sorry you are unable to understand that point, but maybe ask someone who does to explain it to you in detail. Otherwise, when I say 'you are not a user', I mean that I have a mail in my inbox which is signed with your name from which I may quote the phrase "introducing some unusable features like the atmospheric light scattering" - which would appear to the English-speaking reader indicating that you don't use it. > You pretend to be experienced and worry we don't use your know how, Emilian > is > experienced and you rejected his know how. > Would you say everybody but you is stupid. I'm a scientist. I don't believe in persons. I don't believe in Emilian, TIm, Fred or Mathias - I believe in verifiable facts and solid evidence. I believe that each of these person knows much, but that likewise each of these can get things wrong, and when anyone raises an issue, I make up my own mind by thinking it through and testing it myself. I don't think everyone else is stupid, but I do think everyone else can make mistakes just like me, and I have a very long professional experience in recognizing and dealing with my own mistakes. To expect that I would take advice from anyone without looking at the hard evidence available to me is unreasonable. I'm not impressed by titles, merits and experience - I argue with Nobel-price winners just as with students if I think they're wrong (I have done so on occasion). You will be able to verify that in each and every case someone backs up his critique with actual evidence which I can verify, I usually change my position quickly. You will also see me in these cases publicly acknowledge that I was wrong and crediting the person who corrected me. You will also be able to verify that if I have contrary solid evidence, I won't change my position no matter who says anything to me. And that's all there is to it. Back up what you say with evidence and insight, and you'll find me easy to talk to. Make unverifiable claims, and you'll find it very difficult. > How could you say the Shadows system has come after ALS ? > > Looking at the history of Flightgear, i can notice the Shadows system > was a feature in the old time, i have got from GRTUX's database ( inherited) > some old snapshot with Shadows. Yes, but it would seem you don't understand that Rembrandt is not primarily about generating shadows but about deferred rendering. May look to you similar, but is a completely different thing and is completely unrelated. Please ask someone who understand deferred rendering to explain the difference to you. I could likewise argue that there was a skydome in FG before shadows - same issue: looks similar, but isn't. > The modification to the aircraft to get it working is minor, i had to > update our hangar it took only 1 hour to update our hangar (21 officials > models + 12 non official ). Yes, but the modification to get aircraft running under ALS is usually zero, and yet everyone in this discussion sees it as a major problem. So it doesn't really matter how long it takes in practice. I would suggest that you take some time to get your facts organized before we carry this discussion any further. If this is needed at all. * Thorsten ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
