Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Erik Hofman]

On Thu, 2012-02-16 at 01:19 +0100, David Van Mosselbeen wrote:
 Should i remind everyone that this all is about open source and GPL v2
 data. Some spirit that have already proved it's capacity and functionality.
 It's all about data that is contribute by different talented peoples from
 all around the world. It's all about little self made parts from each other
 that is proudly copied and glued together to make somethings. It's all
 about a bunch of enthousiast collaborating together. It's all about thanks
 to ...!

Well said David.

This is hopefully also a good encouragement for the PAF team to keep
developing their version and keep it available in their own hangar.
There's nothing wrong with two different version of the same aircraft
floating around. It's not really custom to FlightGear but almost common
practice for other simulators.

Erik


--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Martin Spott]

Erik Hofman wrote:

 This is hopefully also a good encouragement for the PAF team to keep
 developing their version and keep it available in their own hangar.
 There's nothing wrong with two different version of the same aircraft
 floating around. It's not really custom to FlightGear but almost common
 practice for other simulators.

Well, in fact it's just another example of a missed chance to learn
from other's mistakes.  I'm not sure wether this approach should be
supported 

Cheers,
Martin.
-- 
 Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--

--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 3/9] remove pointless previousInstruction local in FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx |2 --
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
index 34ee61c..787057c 100644
--- a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
+++ b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
@@ -893,7 +893,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment(int id, double 
lat,
 TrafficVectorIterator current, closest, closestOnNetwork;
 TrafficVectorIterator i = activeTraffic.begin();
 bool otherReasonToSlowDown = false;
-bool previousInstruction;
 if (activeTraffic.size()) {
 //while ((i-getId() != id)  (i != activeTraffic.end()))
 while (i != activeTraffic.end()) {
@@ -912,7 +911,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment(int id, double 
lat,
 current = i;
 //closest = current;
 
-previousInstruction = current-getSpeedAdjustment();
 double mindist = HUGE_VAL;
 if (activeTraffic.size()) {
 double course, dist, bearing, az2;
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 6/9] remove pointless useInitialWayPoint/useCurrentWayPoint locals from FGAIFlightPlan::ctor

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/AIModel/AIFlightPlan.cxx |   13 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/AIModel/AIFlightPlan.cxx b/src/AIModel/AIFlightPlan.cxx
index 21ad6f9..b94f033 100644
--- a/src/AIModel/AIFlightPlan.cxx
+++ b/src/AIModel/AIFlightPlan.cxx
@@ -164,25 +164,12 @@ FGAIFlightPlan::FGAIFlightPlan(FGAIAircraft *ac,
   gateId=0;
   taxiRoute = 0;
   start_time = start;
-  bool useInitialWayPoint = true;
-  bool useCurrentWayPoint = false;
   SGPath path( globals-get_fg_root() );
   path.append( /AI/FlightPlans );
   path.append( p );
   
   SGPropertyNode root;
   isValid = true;
-  // This is a bit of a hack:
-  // Normally the value of course will be used to evaluate whether
-  // or not a waypoint will be used for midair initialization of 
-  // an AI aircraft. However, if a course value of 999 will be passed
-  // when an update request is received, which will by definition always be
-  // on the ground and should include all waypoints.
-  if (course == 999) 
-{
-  useInitialWayPoint = false;
-  useCurrentWayPoint = true;
-}
 
   if (path.exists()) 
 {
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 4/9] remove pointless elevation_feet local from FGGroundNetwork::render

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx |4 
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
index 787057c..78e8812 100644
--- a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
+++ b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
@@ -1354,7 +1354,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::render(bool visible)
 group = new osg::Group;
 FGScenery * local_scenery = globals-get_scenery();
 // double elevation_meters = 0.0;
-double elevation_feet = 0.0;
 time_t now = time(NULL) + fgGetLong(/sim/time/warp);
 //for ( FGTaxiSegmentVectorIterator i = segments.begin(); i != 
segments.end(); i++) {
 //double dx = 0;
@@ -1394,7 +1393,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = end;
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, elevationEnd, 
NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationEnd * SG_METER_TO_FEET + 0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
@@ -1454,7 +1452,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = segments[k]-getStart()-getGeod();
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, 
elevationStart, NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationStart * SG_METER_TO_FEET 
+ 0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
@@ -1466,7 +1463,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = segments[k]-getEnd()-getGeod();
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, 
elevationEnd, NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationEnd * SG_METER_TO_FEET + 
0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 2/9] remove pointless minbearing local in FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx |5 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
index 8e9b16f..34ee61c 100644
--- a/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
+++ b/src/Airports/groundnetwork.cxx
@@ -915,7 +915,7 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment(int id, double 
lat,
 previousInstruction = current-getSpeedAdjustment();
 double mindist = HUGE_VAL;
 if (activeTraffic.size()) {
-double course, dist, bearing, minbearing, az2;
+double course, dist, bearing, az2;
 SGGeod curr(SGGeod::fromDegM(lon, lat, alt));
 //TrafficVector iterator closest;
 closest = current;
@@ -937,8 +937,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment(int id, double 
lat,
 mindist = dist;
 closest = i;
 closestOnNetwork = i;
-minbearing = bearing;
-
 }
 }
 //Check traffic at the tower controller
@@ -961,7 +959,6 @@ void FGGroundNetwork::checkSpeedAdjustment(int id, double 
lat,
 //  endl;
 mindist = dist;
 closest = i;
-minbearing = bearing;
 otherReasonToSlowDown = true;
 }
 }
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 9/9] simplify FGRadioTransmission::getFrequency

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/Radio/radio.cxx |   14 +++---
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/Radio/radio.cxx b/src/Radio/radio.cxx
index 169cd32..a22274a 100644
--- a/src/Radio/radio.cxx
+++ b/src/Radio/radio.cxx
@@ -77,19 +77,11 @@ FGRadioTransmission::~FGRadioTransmission()
 
 
 double FGRadioTransmission::getFrequency(int radio) {
-   double freq = 118.0;
switch (radio) {
-   case 1:
-   freq = 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[0]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
-   break;
-   case 2:
-   freq = 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[1]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
-   break;
-   default:
-   freq = 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[0]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
-   
+   case 1:  return 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[0]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
+   case 2:  return 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[1]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
+   default: return 
fgGetDouble(/instrumentation/comm[0]/frequencies/selected-mhz);
}
-   return freq;
 }
 
 
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 8/9] remove unused percent_RPM local from FGPiston::doEnginePower

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp |3 +--
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp 
b/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
index 0f47018..dbd494c 100644
--- a/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
+++ b/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
@@ -733,10 +733,9 @@ void FGPiston::doEnginePower(void)
   FMEP = 0;
   if (Running) {
 // FIXME: this needs to be generalized
-double ME, percent_RPM, power;  // Convienience term for use in the 
calculations
+double ME, power;  // Convienience term for use in the calculations
 ME = Mixture_Efficiency_Correlation-GetValue(m_dot_fuel/m_dot_air);
 
-percent_RPM = RPM/MaxRPM;
 // Guestimate engine friction losses from Figure 4.4 of Engines: An 
Introduction, John Lumley
 FMEP = (-FMEPDynamic * MeanPistonSpeed_fps * fttom - FMEPStatic);
 
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 7/9] remove unused locals from Rotorpart::calculateAlpha

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/FDM/YASim/Rotorpart.cpp |9 ++---
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/FDM/YASim/Rotorpart.cpp b/src/FDM/YASim/Rotorpart.cpp
index bd54f41..b88087a 100644
--- a/src/FDM/YASim/Rotorpart.cpp
+++ b/src/FDM/YASim/Rotorpart.cpp
@@ -377,11 +377,8 @@ float Rotorpart::calculateAlpha(float* v_rel_air, float 
rho,
 float incidence, float cyc, float alphaalt, float *torque,
 float *returnlift)
 {
-float moment[3],v_local[3],v_local_scalar,lift_moment,v_flap[3],v_help[3];
-float ias;//nur f. dgb
-int i,n;
-for (i=0;i3;i++)
-moment[i]=0;
+float v_local[3],v_local_scalar,lift_moment,v_flap[3],v_help[3];
+int n;
 float relgrav = Math::dot3(_normal,_rotor-getGravDirection());
 lift_moment=-_mass*_len*9.81*relgrav;
 *torque=0;//
@@ -427,7 +424,6 @@ float Rotorpart::calculateAlpha(float* v_rel_air, float rho,
 Math::mul3(1/v_local_scalar,v_local,v_help);
 float incidence_of_airspeed = Math::asin(Math::clamp(
 Math::dot3(v_help,_normal),-1,1)) + local_incidence;
-ias = incidence_of_airspeed;
 
 //reduce the ias (Prantl factor)
 float prantl_factor=2/pi*Math::acos(Math::exp(
@@ -437,7 +433,6 @@ float Rotorpart::calculateAlpha(float* v_rel_air, float rho,
 incidence_of_airspeed = (incidence_of_airspeed+
 _rotor-getAirfoilIncidenceNoLift())*prantl_factor
 *_rotor_correction_factor-_rotor-getAirfoilIncidenceNoLift();
-ias = incidence_of_airspeed;
 float lift_wo_cyc = _rotor-getLiftCoef(incidence_of_airspeed
 -cyc*_rotor_correction_factor*prantl_factor,v_local_scalar)
 * v_local_scalar * v_local_scalar * A *rho *0.5;
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 1/9] remove pointless remainingTimeEnroute local in FGAISchedule::update()

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/Traffic/Schedule.cxx |4 
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/Traffic/Schedule.cxx b/src/Traffic/Schedule.cxx
index 789631b..05e4eda 100644
--- a/src/Traffic/Schedule.cxx
+++ b/src/Traffic/Schedule.cxx
@@ -196,7 +196,6 @@ bool FGAISchedule::update(time_t now, const SGVec3d 
userCart)
   time_t 
 totalTimeEnroute, 
 elapsedTimeEnroute,
-remainingTimeEnroute, 
 deptime = 0;
   if (!valid) {
 return false;
@@ -259,7 +258,6 @@ bool FGAISchedule::update(time_t now, const SGVec3d 
userCart)
 totalTimeEnroute = flight-getArrivalTime() - flight-getDepartureTime();
 if (flight-getDepartureTime()  now) {
   elapsedTimeEnroute   = now - flight-getDepartureTime();
-  remainingTimeEnroute = totalTimeEnroute - elapsedTimeEnroute;
   double x = elapsedTimeEnroute / (double) totalTimeEnroute;
   
 // current pos is based on great-circle course between departure/arrival,
@@ -275,7 +273,6 @@ bool FGAISchedule::update(time_t now, const SGVec3d 
userCart)
   speed = ((distanceM - coveredDistance) * SG_METER_TO_NM) / 3600.0;
 } else {
 // not departed yet
-  remainingTimeEnroute = totalTimeEnroute;
   elapsedTimeEnroute = 0;
   position = dep-geod();
   SG_LOG (SG_GENERAL, SG_BULK, Traffic Manager:  Flight is pending, 
departure in 
@@ -283,7 +280,6 @@ bool FGAISchedule::update(time_t now, const SGVec3d 
userCart)
 }
   } else {
 // departure / arrival coincident
-remainingTimeEnroute = totalTimeEnroute = 0.0;
 elapsedTimeEnroute = 0;
 position = dep-geod();
   }
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] Cleanup unused locals

[Chris Forbes]

These patches clean up some set-but-unused locals which cause warnings on 
current GCC.
There should be no change in semantics.
Tested against c5eba72c758b92b9120c38ae101f4a4ab2044ff8 ('next' at time of 
writing)

-- Chris


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 5/9] remove pointless elevation_feet local from FGStartupController::render

[Chris Forbes]

---
 src/ATC/trafficcontrol.cxx |5 -
 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/ATC/trafficcontrol.cxx b/src/ATC/trafficcontrol.cxx
index 8e29f04..eb8ca7e 100644
--- a/src/ATC/trafficcontrol.cxx
+++ b/src/ATC/trafficcontrol.cxx
@@ -1328,8 +1328,6 @@ void FGStartupController::render(bool visible)
 group = new osg::Group;
 FGScenery * local_scenery = globals-get_scenery();
 //double elevation_meters = 0.0;
-double elevation_feet = 0.0;
-
 
 //for ( FGTaxiSegmentVectorIterator i = segments.begin(); i != 
segments.end(); i++) {
 double dx = 0;
@@ -1370,7 +1368,6 @@ void FGStartupController::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = end;
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, 
elevationEnd, NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationEnd * SG_METER_TO_FEET + 
0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
@@ -1433,7 +1430,6 @@ void FGStartupController::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = segment-getStart()-getGeod();
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, 
elevationStart, NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationStart * 
SG_METER_TO_FEET + 0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
@@ -1445,7 +1441,6 @@ void FGStartupController::render(bool visible)
 SGGeod center2 = segment-getEnd()-getGeod();
 center2.setElevationM(SG_MAX_ELEVATION_M);
 if (local_scenery-get_elevation_m( center2, 
elevationEnd, NULL )) {
-elevation_feet = elevationEnd * 
SG_METER_TO_FEET + 0.5;
 //elevation_meters += 0.5;
 }
 else {
-- 
1.7.5.4


--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Alan Teeder]

Erik Hofman wrote:

 This is hopefully also a good encouragement for the PAF team to keep
 developing their version and keep it available in their own hangar.
 There's nothing wrong with two different version of the same aircraft
 floating around. It's not really custom to FlightGear but almost common
 practice for other simulators.

If the authors can´t sort it out themselves, why not each have their own 
version of the aircraft within FG.  This is not without precedent.

I don´t think that consigning improved aircraft to a 3rd party hangar is 
good for the FG project as a whole.

As FG is GPL there is no reason why each cannot draw code from the other.

Please move the bickering to a private forum.  The points have been made 
(many times) and it is clear that neither party gets on well with the other.

Alan 


--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Erik Hofman]

On Thu, 2012-02-16 at 09:18 +, Martin Spott wrote:
 Erik Hofman wrote:
 
  This is hopefully also a good encouragement for the PAF team to keep
  developing their version and keep it available in their own hangar.
  There's nothing wrong with two different version of the same aircraft
  floating around. It's not really custom to FlightGear but almost common
  practice for other simulators.
 
 Well, in fact it's just another example of a missed chance to learn
 from other's mistakes.  I'm not sure wether this approach should be
 supported 

I agree it's sad but sometimes it's inevitable.

Erik


--
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

[Flightgear-devel] release/2.6.0 development ends today

[Torsten Dreyer]

Hi,

as we are going to release version 2.6.0 this weekend, the branches 
release/2.6.0 in simgear, flightgear and fgdata shall receive no more 
updates after today (Thursday), 19:00 UTC until further notice to give 
those who are preparing binaries and tar-balls some undisturbed time to 
do their work.

So, please: no pushes to release/2.6.0 in any repository! The branches 
next (fg+sg) and master (fgdata) are unaffected.

Thank you,

Torsten

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9

[Heiko Schulz]

 They seek only to 
 discredit me in the eyes of all. I think I've proven myself many times 
 and I have never refused any improvements for my aircraft hangar. 
 Except, I confess, for JSBSim (and even if the work is good why I 
 refuse, even JSBSim ).

Beside the fact that it isn't quite true, you are discrediting yourself with 
this words, don't you notice it?

 But this list is primarily a development list. I would like people who 
 want me to do harm, do to other places. Of course Oliver, there is no 
 question of you in this sentence :)

So why don't you keep to your own words, and keep that away from this list?!

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Final 2.6.0 Release Preparations

[Gijs de Rooy]

@Curt: in the media subforum ;-)

 Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 00:46:08 +0100
 From: joac...@gmx.de
 To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Final 2.6.0 Release Preparations
 
 On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:38:59 -0600
 Curtis Olson curtol...@gmail.com wrote:
 
  Obviously I need to steer clear of images that show development or testing 
  features that are not yet available in the v2.6 release 
  
 What about custom scenery?
 
 
 
 Joe
 
 
 
 
 
 --
 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
  --
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Durk Talsma]

On 11 Feb 2012, at 21:46, Clement de l'Hamaide wrote:

 Hi all,
 
[ SNIP]

 Cheers,
 Clément
 --

I'm trying to take a neutral position here, so I'm not going to comment on who 
is right and who's wrong, but instead would like to propose a possible solution 
that might keep everybody happy in the intermediate to long term. Last year, we 
have discussed several options to split fgdata, but decided to put these plans 
on hold until the 2.6.0 release was finished, for very practical reasons. Once 
we commence with these plans, it is very likely that we have a separate 
fgaircraft repo, and the idea is that we would allow more contributers access 
rights to this repository. In such a situation, one or more members of the PAF 
group could gain access rights and commit their own contribution as a separate 
version. 

While I generally agree with Martin that I would rather encourage collaboration 
rather then competition, I don't think it would be in the interest of the 
project to see a group of motivated contributers being denied access due to a 
personal dispute. A little bit of competition is not necessarily bad either, 
because it motivates people to improve their own work. Healthy competition may 
be beneficial specifically if the efforts are directed to different models, as 
opposed to replicating an existing one. But if we can't avoid that, I'm not 
sure why we should selectively block access to our repository either. 

Finally, I would also like to point out that the PAF team could already clone 
the fgrepository, merge their changes and file a merge request. 

Cheers,
Durk

 

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Detlef Faber]

Am 15.02.2012 19:30, schrieb kreuzritter2000:
 Am Sonntag, den 12.02.2012, 11:00 +0100 schrieb Erik Hofman:
 So Emanuel has every right to dismiss any modifications on *his* model
 and to update git accordingly.

 I agree he is the owner of the model, but he is not the owner of the
 FlightGear project.
 I see the aircraft name DC-3 as a placeholder owned by the FlightGear
 project and Emanuel modified it by adding data to it. So he is not the
 owner of the placeholder.

 What i want to say is, that it will get a community driven project
 nowhere if we have persons sitting there refusing commits from others
 only because they have personal issues with them or because they were
 the ones that started an aircraft at first place.
 Refusing commits is only acceptable if the data is not GPL, a copyright
 violation or a degradation of the existing data.
 And it won't help the whole project if we have 1...n different DC-3
 aircrafts on git and everyone is doing his own thing.
 So there is one DC-3 starting out as a placeholder owned by the
 FlightGear projet and individuals should learn to work together and
 improve the placeholder.
It's common practice that contribution get reviewed. In FG this is 
usually done by the maintainer, in most cases the initial commiter of 
the Aircraft. The Maintainer decides what to include, what to reject and 
what has to be modified. Usually, before starting a Project, one does 
some homework, collects data, pilot reports, drawings, reads manuals, 
etc. With this knowledge, he should be capable to review contributions. 
This has worked for FlightGear for years and I don't see a point in 
reverting this, just because of personal dislike.

To be clear. Noone has suffered physical injury, no material destroyed 
and no law broken. Emmanuel keeps collecting compatible contributions 
and the PAF can maintain their (really impressive) modifications in 
their hangar.

Both parties should stop the whining, shrug their shoulders and continue 
having fun working on FlightGear.

 If persons do not comply on working together on a single aircraft then i
 suggest to remove the existing aircraft data completly.
 So that a willing group of volunteers that want to work together can
 start from the beginning

 So in other words, Emanual has every right to dismiss any modifications
 on *his* model but he has no right to refuse improvements of the
 FlightGear Project.
 And one aircraft is like a couple of lines of source code in the
 project.

 It would be horrible if programmers would say:
 This is my function and no one is allowed to modify it, i  will refuse
 any commit.


 In they case i get this mentioned conflict wrong you can ignore the
 above words.

 Best Regards,
   Oliver C.











 --
 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


--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[syd adams]

For what its worth , I see several of my aircraft in this hangar and I
wasn't asked permission for that  so sounds like a ridiculous
argument from the start . This team should others as they wish to be
treated .Good place to end  the discussion.

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Clement de l'Hamaide]

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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[Heiko Schulz]

 For what its worth , I see several of my aircraft in this hangar and I
 wasn't asked permission for that  so sounds like a ridiculous
 argument from the start . This team should others as they wish to be
 treated .Good place to end  the discussion.

Several? 
I only see one aircraft (Aerostar 700) of yours!!

Beside the L39 Breitling, most of all others had been started by Mr. Baranger, 
who claims ownership and want to be asked as well. 

But anyway- the one (as David called him) seems to managed what he wanted. 
Congratulations!

I really recommend all participiants here to read along what David van 
Mosselbeen wrote- it will light up about some things!

Here you go, in the case you missed it:
http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=55540383887f9aa7959911b6affbb8be%40sun.pinguin.localforum_name=flightgear-devel

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[syd adams]

yes my mistake i misread a name. My point was that the whole argument
was about getting permission , and it seemed a little one-sided.
All the aircraft in that hangar are someone else original work.And I
dont have a problem with that,  just the basis of the argument.
Yes the 'its GPL so i can do what ever i like, so na na boo boo '
argument comes up over and over and over   we all know what GPL is
,
but i never hear , hey i'll help you maintain it !
Anyway , on a more positive note ,I'd be interested in getting any
aerostar-700 improvements into fgdata , if the team is interested.

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9

[kreuzritter2000]

Am Donnerstag, den 16.02.2012, 00:24 +0100 schrieb BARANGER Emmanuel:

 I think you misinterpreted that. I refuse nothing and besides, when I 
 had access to the fantastic work of the PAF Team, I added it on GIT, 
 albeit with some corrections and / or amended (with error may be possible ).

Oh, then i misinterpreted that. Thanks for clarification.

 
 This is the PAF team that refuses all. 

But one question, how can they refuse a commit when they are no
maintainer of fg-data?


Best Regards,
 Oliver C.



--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [PATCH 8/9] remove unused percent_RPM local from FGPiston::doEnginePower

[Ron Jensen]

On Thursday 16 February 2012 02:07:53 Chris Forbes wrote:
 ---
  src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp |3 +--
  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

 diff --git a/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
 b/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp index 0f47018..dbd494c
 100644
 --- a/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
 +++ b/src/FDM/JSBSim/models/propulsion/FGPiston.cpp
 @@ -733,10 +733,9 @@ void FGPiston::doEnginePower(void)
FMEP = 0;
if (Running) {
  // FIXME: this needs to be generalized
 -double ME, percent_RPM, power;  // Convienience term for use in the
 calculations +double ME, power;  // Convienience term for use in the
 calculations ME =
 Mixture_Efficiency_Correlation-GetValue(m_dot_fuel/m_dot_air);

 -percent_RPM = RPM/MaxRPM;
  // Guestimate engine friction losses from Figure 4.4 of Engines: An
 Introduction, John Lumley FMEP = (-FMEPDynamic * MeanPistonSpeed_fps *
 fttom - FMEPStatic);

I will apply this one upstream and let it trickle back down, thanks.

Ron

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice autorisations

[HB-GRAL]

Hi Clément

Am 16.02.12 17:45, schrieb Clement de l'Hamaide:

 I have create a discussion here : 
 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=28709446 and I haven't 
 received answer from devel list ...

I noticed this post. Maybe it is better to clone the gitorious repo 
fgdata, send a merge request with your changes AND a note to the list 
announcing your merge request. Much easier to review your changes for 
other developers with commit rights. (I apologize in advance in case 
you’re already aware of this workflow).

 Other example : 
 http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=28360748 and no answer 
 from devel list

The multiplayer map is not in FlightGear core project. Changing a single 
aircraft symbol for the map is not possible in FlightGear fgdata code, 
it is in scripts for the multiplayer map maintained by pigeon (as far as 
I know). So your changes can not be merged in here anywhere. Maybe you 
have to contact pigeon for this.

(Personally I think branding aircrafts with individual symbols is not 
a very good idea for a map, going to show 300 different symbols, but 
that’s another discussion and this is not mine.)

Cheers, Yves




--
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

[Flightgear-devel] Aircraft/Scenery development list needed?

[HB-GRAL]

Hi Curt

Would it be a good idea to have a second mailinglist for aircraft and 
scenery development? I know there have been much more lists around in 
past. For me it starts to be very hard to find flightgear core related 
topics in this list now. I tried to add some filters to my reader, but 
without success. I hope there isn’t already another list and I missed it ;-)

Cheers, Yves




--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9

[Roy Caligan]

Hi Tuomas,

Actually, I've read the same README and come up with four different 
camera configurations. I haven't tested them though, because I'm still 
missing the pre-distortion piece of the puzzle. By bouncing the image 
off a curved mirror, the image will be distorted as it appears on the 
screen. So you need to pre-distort the image and then bounce it off the 
mirror so the two distortions cancel each other out, and the image looks 
correct.


There's a couple of ways I think I can do this. One way is by using the 
osgDistortion tool 
(http://www.openscenegraph.org/projects/osg/browser/OpenSceneGraph/trunk/examples/osgdistortion/osgdistortion.cpp). 
It looks similar to the code libraries Paul Bourke wrote, but I don't 
know how to integrate that into FlightGear. The second way is by using a 
program called Projection Designer with one of the camera groups I've 
created (http://orihalcon.jp/projdesigner/). But again, I'm not sure how 
to make FlightGear use the program.


Roy

On 2/15/2012 10:38 AM, flightgear-devel-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net 
wrote:

Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:35:38 +0200
From:tuomas.kuosma...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Projection system question
To:flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Message-ID:bnxyms.lzfsfl.1hge150-...@mx.google.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Hi.

Two things: First, keep us posted of your progress:)  I am also working on 
simulator stuff at our aviation club, so this kind of stuff is interesting to 
follow.

Another thing that comes to my mind is a spherical door projection example I 
remember seeing on README.multiscreen (or it was one other file in the docs/ 
dir in flightgear sources) - Did you check that example out, did it not do what 
you needed? Unfortunately I am also just looking into all this, so I cannot be 
of more help, but I remember trying that one, and it warped the display to a 
circle and the perspective was all curved, so maybe it could be something 
useful?

Anyway, thanks for posting the link, that kind of setup looks very interesting, 
given it uses just one projector. Might work for us also..

/Tuomas

--
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

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue 11

[BARANGER Emmanuel]

Le 16/02/2012 23:02, flightgear-devel-requ...@lists.sourceforge.net a 
écrit :

 Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 11:02:46 + (GMT) From: Heiko Schulz 
 aeitsch...@yahoo.de Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel 
 Digest, Vol 70, Issue 9 To: FlightGear developers discussions 
 flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: 
 1329390166.56815.yahoomailclas...@web29504.mail.ird.yahoo.com 
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
 question of you in this sentence
 So why don't you keep to your own words, and keep that away from this list?!
Simply because when I am attacked and insulted in public I have a right 
of reply logic.

 From: Clement de l'Hamaideclem...@hotmail.fr
 Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Fair practice  autorisations
 To:flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 Message-ID:col120-w432bd9461f2fd49f0105e3c3...@phx.gbl
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1


 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 !
So here is an insult to all those (and there are many) who appreciate my 
work and my aircraft hangar. Who insult who ? Curt, good news for you, 
the Arup S2 is a shit, as modeled by me ( dixit Cément )
 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 !
The last argument fashionable but totally ridiculous. Decidedly, if they 
find nothing more to say it becomes ridiculous.  Clement was yet well 
pleased to make his work on the Dc 3 of my shed. Memory loss certainly.

Let's be clear in this case. I must model planes full, finished, perfect 
etc. .
In this case the PAF Team would not exist even. Because none of them 
would have wanted to improve the original Dc 3 FG. Similarly for the 
Lancair, the Techman etc. ...

This is because my airplanes are available in the state, that people 
flock to help. These comments are totally contradictoirs.

In this case the PAF Team would not exist even. Because none of them 
would have wanted to improve the original Dc 3 FG. Similarly for the 
Lancair, the Techman etc. ...

This is because my planes are available in the state that people flock 
to help.

I model airplanes complet, finished, perfect etc. .  and no one will 
want to improve and entréer in the large family of contributors. 
Otherwise this would create new aircraft, of course.

Either I continue as I did since 2006 and many other contributors appear 
coming, as the PAF Team that has a very short memory as you can see.

I never refused improvements (Long Ez, Velocity XL, Carreidas 160, B25, 
A26 Invader, I16, UH 1, etc. ) So stop slandering without knowing.

And it is only sad to see them continue to ridicule himself this way. 
Personally, this does not prevent me from living and I especially do not 
want it to anyone. Their misunderstanding is sad that's all. See so much 
talent wasted by so much animosity and stupidity is just a pity

 Message: 20
 Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 19:32:49 +0100
 From: kreuzritter2000kreuzritter2...@gmx.de
 Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Flightgear-devel Digest, Vol 70, Issue
   9
 To:flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
 Message-ID:1329417169.3356.3.camel@blackbox
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

 Am Donnerstag, den 16.02.2012, 00:24 +0100 schrieb BARANGER Emmanuel:
 Oh, then i misinterpreted that. Thanks for clarification.
No problem :)
 This is the PAF team that refuses all.
 But one question, how can they refuse a commit when they are no
 maintainer of fg-data?
Disease, memory loss, madness, desire to hurt or something other I do 
not know lol

Regards. Emmanuel

-- 
BARANGER Emmanuel

http://helijah.free.fr

http://embaranger.free.fr


--
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