Hi everybody !

Sorry to bring this up again - Just catching up on the hundreds of
postings on both lists ... and I wanted to add the following:

Jon Berndt wrote:
Yes, I've made an attempt in the JSBSim config file format to include a "done-ness"
specifier for the FDM:

Beta, Alpha, Release, UNRELEASEABLE, etc.  IMHO, probably ONLY Release models should 
be in
the base package.

I agree with much of what has been said so far - concerning the reputation of FlightGear suffering from various incomplete aircraft ... at times it's really hard to tell what's the cause of a problem, whether it's your hardware, the simulator or a particular aircraft ...

So, I like the above idea, even though I don't think that it's necessary to remove "immature" aircarft, rather one could try a compromise -
provide additional "maturity flags" within each aircraft's XML
definition file, for example:


        experimental
        pre-alpha
        alpha
        pre-beta
        beta
        "okay/working"

That way we would have one additional tag within the XML file, like:

        <maturity>alpha</maturity>

And would thereby enable the *user* to choose what kind of aircraft
he/she wants to use.

So, while the usual parameter

        --show-aircraft

would currently display ALL available aircraft, we could have an
additional parameter like:

        --min-maturity-level=beta

to return only those aircraft in the base package that match the
corresponding criteria.

This would of course only be optional - but I think it could really
reduce some of the frustration new users encounter when first trying
out FG.

So, one would end up having a definable maturity level for aircraft,
in order to address the issues concerning "too much realism" it
might be a good idea to also enable users to adjust the realism
level on demand - this is something that other simulators offer, too -
and it has been discussed on the devel list before ...

One could still ship ALL aircraft, but prevent new users from trying
unfinished aircraft and drawing false conclusions.

Probably, it would not even be a bad idea to make --show-aircraft return
by default only "relatively mature" aircraft instead of all the
experimental stuff that's in the base package ?

If that idea is accepted I would not mind taking care of the
corresponding changes that make FlightGear return only aircraft
meeting particular "maturity" requirements, frankly spoken simply
because I was going to change one or two similar things, anyway -
e.g. I wanted to be able to tell whether a particular aircraft is part
of the base package or not, that's why I suggested some time ago to
provide an additional tag for that purpose, too.




---------- Boris

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d

Reply via email to