Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi Gèrard,

Sorry for my late reply. I tested your hook and it seems working very good.
I'll clean up as you suggested. Plus, the -test*.xml files should be removed 
since these are
only for my experimental patch that I posted a while ago, but are not completed 
yet.

Best,

Tat

On Dec 4, 2008, at 4:57 PM, gerard robin wrote:

> Hello Tat,
>
> I forgot to tell you, that,  you may want to clean the  hook.xml file, since 
> their is some unuseful commented  out part.
> That was a first attend to get the right hook animation. , YASIm compatible
> being replaced  by  a more  elegant solution.
> I have included the feature in both jsbsim fdm files =>  jsbsim-test-set  and 
>  
> jsbsim-set, in case of 
>
> Cheers..
>
>
> On jeudi 04 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
>> Hi Gèrard,
>>
>> Thank you very much!!
>> I will test it tonight.
>>
>> On Dec 4, 2008, at 3:48 AM, gerard robin wrote:
>>> On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Done, i hope it will suit for you.
>>> Tested, by my  test pilot,
>>> here the result:
>>> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-takeoff.jpg
>>> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-approach.jpg
>>> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-landing.jpg
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> --
>>> Gérard
>>> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/


--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Durk Talsma]

On Sunday 07 December 2008 14:21:19 Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> To be clear, the problematic preferences.xml was found in
> FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2 , not in CVS.
>

Ah, yes. That's what I meant. This change slipped from my local distribution 
into the RC. It's never been in CVS. Sorry for the confusion.

Cheers,
Durk



--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

Durk Talsma a écrit :
> Hi Fred,
>
> Yikes. That's probably a resulting from getting my triple screen setup 
> working. Agreed that shouldn't go into CVS. Thanks for catching this.
>
>   
 http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
 

To be clear, the problematic preferences.xml was found in
FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2 , not in CVS.

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/   Photo gallery
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/FlightGear Scenery Designer


--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Durk Talsma]

Hi Fred,

Yikes. That's probably a resulting from getting my triple screen setup 
working. Agreed that shouldn't go into CVS. Thanks for catching this.

Cheers,
Durk

On Sunday 07 December 2008 12:54:17 Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> Frederic Bouvier a écrit :
> > Durk Talsma a écrit :
> >> Hi Everybody,
> >>
> >> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear
> >> 1.9 release on my webserver:
> >>
> >> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> >> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> >> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> >
> > A test package has been created :
> > ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgsetup-1.99.5-pre1.exe
> > [201Mb]
>
> Hi Durk,
>
> there is an odd camera-group setting in the preferences.xml file. This
> is not the standard preferences.xml file that we can get in CVS.
>
> -Fred



--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

Frederic Bouvier a écrit :
> Durk Talsma a écrit :
>   
>> Hi Everybody,
>>
>> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
>> release on my webserver:
>>
>> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
>> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
>> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
>>   
>> 
>
> A test package has been created :
> ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgsetup-1.99.5-pre1.exe
> [201Mb]
>   

Hi Durk,

there is an odd camera-group setting in the preferences.xml file. This
is not the standard preferences.xml file that we can get in CVS.

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/   Photo gallery
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/FlightGear Scenery Designer


--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

Durk Talsma a écrit :
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
>
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
>   

A test package has been created :
ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/Win32/fgsetup-1.99.5-pre1.exe
[201Mb]

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/   Photo gallery
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/FlightGear Scenery Designer


--
SF.Net email is Sponsored by MIX09, March 18-20, 2009 in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The future of the web can't happen without you.  Join us at MIX09 to help
pave the way to the Next Web now. Learn more and register at
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;208669438;13503038;i?http://2009.visitmix.com/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

Hello Tat,

I forgot to tell you, that,  you may want to clean the  hook.xml file, since 
their is some unuseful commented  out part.
That was a first attend to get the right hook animation. , YASIm compatible
being replaced  by  a more  elegant solution.
I have included the feature in both jsbsim fdm files =>  jsbsim-test-set  and  
jsbsim-set, in case of 

Cheers..


On jeudi 04 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi Gèrard,
>
> Thank you very much!!
> I will test it tonight.
>
> On Dec 4, 2008, at 3:48 AM, gerard robin wrote:
> > On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:

> >
> > Done, i hope it will suit for you.
> > Tested, by my  test pilot,
> > here the result:
> > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-takeoff.jpg
> > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-approach.jpg
> > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-landing.jpg
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Gérard
> > http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi Gèrard,

Thank you very much!!
I will test it tonight.

On Dec 4, 2008, at 3:48 AM, gerard robin wrote:

> On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
>> Hi Gèrard,
>>
>> Thanks for the offer!!
>> I really appreciate it.
>>
>> Please add a hook capability to zero/jsbsim and get it committed. I
>> think Syd will agree with me on this since it won't affect the Yasim
>> part of zero at all.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Tat
>>
> Done, i hope it will suit for you.
> Tested, by my  test pilot,
> here the result:
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-takeoff.jpg
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-approach.jpg
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-landing.jpg
>
> Cheers
> -- 
> Gérard
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/
>
> J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
> Voltaire
>
>
> -
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Syd]

gerard robin wrote:
> On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
>   
>> Hi Gèrard,
>>
>> Thanks for the offer!!
>> I really appreciate it.
>>
>> Please add a hook capability to zero/jsbsim and get it committed. I
>> think Syd will agree with me on this since it won't affect the Yasim
>> part of zero at all.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Tat
>>
>> 
> Done, i hope it will suit for you.
> Tested, by my  test pilot,
>  here the result:
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-takeoff.jpg
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-approach.jpg
> http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-landing.jpg
>
> Cheers
>   
Yes , I've begun to dabble with JSBsim, (DC-6B), but don't know nearly 
enough to try it myself ...
and Ive trying to pawn it off on you anyway , Tat ;) 

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi Gèrard,
>
> Thanks for the offer!!
> I really appreciate it.
>
> Please add a hook capability to zero/jsbsim and get it committed. I
> think Syd will agree with me on this since it won't affect the Yasim
> part of zero at all.
>
> Best,
>
> Tat
>
Done, i hope it will suit for you.
Tested, by my  test pilot,
 here the result:
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-takeoff.jpg
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-approach.jpg
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/Zero-Carrier-landing.jpg

Cheers
-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi Gèrard,

Thanks for the offer!!
I really appreciate it.

Please add a hook capability to zero/jsbsim and get it committed. I  
think Syd will agree with me on this since it won't affect the Yasim  
part of zero at all.

Best,

Tat
>>
>>
>>

>> So If someone, who is familiar with JSBSim /
>> external forces, is kind enough to add a hook capability to zero/
>> jsbsim, I'm very happy

>>
>>
> Hello, Tat
>
> Yes, i can do it
> It won't be difficult, and if you want  i  could include it in CVS.
> This won't break any of the existing files, only an an add on.
>


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi Curt,

> (are we going to release 1.9.0, aren't we. I'm a bit confused with our
> versioning thingies... We need to have more clear versioning pilocy,
> but this should be discussed some other time).
>
> Part of the confusion is my fault.  It was my understanding from  
> discussion a year ago that the 1.x numbers were for the plib branch  
> (most likely 1.0 being the last real plib release.)  And then the  
> first OSG based release would be v2.0.  I somehow missed the  
> discussion and rational that arrived at a v1.9 version for the first  
> OSG based release.  So internally I had been marking the development  
> version as 1.99.x and was up to 1.99.5 (nearing 2.0 in my mind) and  
> had commited that to cvs

Okay, I understand the background of this issue. I'll make a 1.9.0- 
pre1 package for mac os x tonight. Maybe I'll leave 1.99.5 in the  
version file at this moment.


> I'm working on a script to streamline the releases and have it  
> mostly ready for SimGear, but I decided to hold off pushing that  
> into production until I got a clearer direction of what we wanted to  
> do with version numbers.

I hope this doen't mean that we might have a different version number  
for the next release. I hate to have some fights/discussions on  
version numbers right before the release like "1.0.0 vs 0.9.11" again.

Anyway, it is a good idea to postpone the script support before having  
a clear versionig policy and release process. I do want to discuss  
these, probably after this release unless many developers want to  
improve our release process and versioning policy.

Best,

Tat

p.s.
I hope you guys won't take this as a critisism. I just want to do some  
help.

I do thank Curt, Durk, and so many developers for their efforts on  
this great project. 

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On mercredi 03 décembre 2008, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
> Hi,
>
> First of all, many thanks for your effort on this.
>
>

SNIP
>
> By the way, I'm glad to have Zero in the base package. I'll also try
> taking time to improve it too but don't know if I can since I'm
> extremely busy right now. So If someone, who is familiar with JSBSim /
> external forces, is kind enough to add a hook capability to zero/
> jsbsim, I'm very happy (Catapult launch is not needed since it does't
> have one). I also need to improve it's Jsbsim FDM but that will be
> done after the release due to lacking of time.
>
> Best,
>
> Tat
>

Hello, Tat

Yes, i can do it
It won't be difficult, and if you want  i  could include it in CVS.
This won't break any of the existing files, only an an add on.

Cheers  



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

- "Curtis Olson" a écrit :

> On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Tatsuhiro Nishioka wrote:
>> First of all, many thanks for your effort on this.
>> 
>> I've been downloading the tar files but these are still being
>> downloaded and will take about 24 or more hours My network is TFFH
>> but it doesn't help me this time.
>> 
>> Could you (or Curt) give a tag (like RELEASE_1_9_0_PRE1) to the source
>> files and base packages in the cvs so I can check out instead of
>> downloading the tarballs?
>> (are we going to release 1.9.0, aren't we. I'm a bit confused with our
>> versioning thingies... We need to have more clear versioning pilocy,
>> but this should be discussed some other time).
> 
> Part of the confusion is my fault. It was my understanding from
> discussion a year ago that the 1.x numbers were for the plib branch
> (most likely 1.0 being the last real plib release.) And then the first
> OSG based release would be v2.0. I somehow missed the discussion and
> rational that arrived at a v1.9 version for the first OSG based
> release. So internally I had been marking the development version as
> 1.99.x and was up to 1.99.5 (nearing 2.0 in my mind) and had commited
> that to cvs.
> 
> I'm working on a script to streamline the releases and have it mostly
> ready for SimGear, but I decided to hold off pushing that into
> production until I got a clearer direction of what we wanted to do
> with version numbers.

1.99.x is OK for me. I was just worried that prereleases don't have a 
-preX or -rcX suffix that shows it is not the official release. And I
agree with Tat, a CVS tag is always useful.

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/  Photo gallery - album photo
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/   FlightGear Scenery Designer


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Curtis Olson]

On Tue, Dec 2, 2008 at 7:36 PM, Tatsuhiro Nishioka
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> First of all, many thanks for your effort on this.
>
> I've been downloading the tar files but  these are still being
> downloaded and will take about 24 or more hours My network is TFFH
> but it doesn't help me this time.
>
> Could you (or Curt) give a tag (like RELEASE_1_9_0_PRE1) to the source
> files and base packages in the cvs so I can check out instead of
> downloading the tarballs?
> (are we going to release 1.9.0, aren't we. I'm a bit confused with our
> versioning thingies... We need to have more clear versioning pilocy,
> but this should be discussed some other time).


Part of the confusion is my fault.  It was my understanding from discussion
a year ago that the 1.x numbers were for the plib branch (most likely 1.0
being the last real plib release.)  And then the first OSG based release
would be v2.0.  I somehow missed the discussion and rational that arrived at
a v1.9 version for the first OSG based release.  So internally I had been
marking the development version as 1.99.x and was up to 1.99.5 (nearing 2.0
in my mind) and had commited that to cvs.

I'm working on a script to streamline the releases and have it mostly ready
for SimGear, but I decided to hold off pushing that into production until I
got a clearer direction of what we wanted to do with version numbers.

Curt.
-- 
Curtis Olson: http://baron.flightgear.org/~curt/
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Tatsuhiro Nishioka]

Hi,

First of all, many thanks for your effort on this.

I've been downloading the tar files but  these are still being  
downloaded and will take about 24 or more hours My network is TFFH  
but it doesn't help me this time.

Could you (or Curt) give a tag (like RELEASE_1_9_0_PRE1) to the source  
files and base packages in the cvs so I can check out instead of  
downloading the tarballs?
(are we going to release 1.9.0, aren't we. I'm a bit confused with our  
versioning thingies... We need to have more clear versioning pilocy,  
but this should be discussed some other time).

So far fgfs works fine except only a few problems (with code from cvs  
as of yesterday). I'll try to get these fixed until the official  
release date. Thanks goes to those who tested my binaries and reported  
bugs/improvements. Now it works on many Macs.

By the way, I'm glad to have Zero in the base package. I'll also try  
taking time to improve it too but don't know if I can since I'm  
extremely busy right now. So If someone, who is familiar with JSBSim /  
external forces, is kind enough to add a hook capability to zero/ 
jsbsim, I'm very happy (Catapult launch is not needed since it does't  
have one). I also need to improve it's Jsbsim FDM but that will be  
done after the release due to lacking of time.

Best,

Tat

On Dec 1, 2008, at 2:15 AM, Durk Talsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi Everybody,
>
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending  
> FlightGear 1.9
> release on my webserver:
>
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
>
>
> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on  
> various
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total  
> number of
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature  
> richness
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
>
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it  
> is very
> well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> UFO : Classified
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> Zero: WW-II Fighter
>
> Comments are welcome
>
> Cheers,
> Durk
>
> --- 
> --
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's  
> challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win  
> great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in  
> the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 13:30:17 +0100, gerard wrote in message
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Arnt Karlsen wrote:

> > Though, if we are talking about the SR71-Blackbird model, i can say
> > ( since i am the author) that it is up to now only a toy,
>
> ..rub it in, I was just trying to save 3 key hits by
> picking the shorter name. ;o)
>
> > not a realistic model aircraft.
>
> ..yeah, but when people try to get away with cocky shortcuts,
> FG should punish them like in RL, randomly, some people are
> indeed stupid lucky, they survive their idiot stunts.  ;o)
>

Yes, the model could have some security, or the jettison  process in case of 
emergency.
May be i must include that part of feature like i did recently, with the F-8E:
=> Prohibiting to open the canopy when we are in air, only allowed with 
jettison (the canopy is then ejected)
=>Lost of canopy if it remain open during take off.

With the Blackbird at 8 ft,  ejection remain critical.
Though, their were some attend for parachuting  at such altitude

http://cubanology.com/Articles/Parachuting_From_The_Stratospere.htm


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Arnt Karlsen]

On Mon, 1 Dec 2008 13:30:17 +0100, gerard wrote in message 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:28:53 +, James wrote in message
> >
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > On 30 Nov 2008, at 19:08, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > > > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge
> > > > planes. I would suggest:
> > > > - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for
> > > > new users.
> > >
> > > Sadly agreed - like the SR-71, it's prominent enough in
> > > screenshots that people will know about it regardless, but it's
> > > not the most forgiving of flying experiences.
> >
> > ..are we trying to be forgiving or realistic?  Crashing the SR-71
> > because it's hard to fly, is a feature (of it), not a bug. ;o)
> 
> Though, if we are talking about the SR71-Blackbird model, i can say
> ( since i am the author) that it is up to now only a toy,

..rub it in, I was just trying to save 3 key hits by 
picking the shorter name. ;o)

> not a realistic model aircraft.

..yeah, but when people try to get away with cocky shortcuts, 
FG should punish them like in RL, randomly, some people are
indeed stupid lucky, they survive their idiot stunts.  ;o)

> > > > - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the
> > > > aircraft is only 3MB in size.
> >
> > ..amen.


-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Erik Hofman wrote:
> James Turner wrote:
> > On 1 Dec 2008, at 11:03, Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:
> >> For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
> >> png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
> >> tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest
> >> textures.
> >
> > An automatic script, that runs over the entire repository, is clearly
> > the way to go here. I prototyped such a thing myself, but wasn't
> > confident enough in my ability to update the .xml files to point to
> > foo/blah/image.png instead of foo/blah/image.rgb - it needs some work
> > by someone more familiar with regexps than I claim to be :)
>
> I don't aprove anyone to update my models to use png instead of rgb
> since it I still use an old version af ac3d that only supports rgb files.
>
> I see little use for changing to png anyhow since it only saves some
> bytes when the base package is extracted but it adds loading speed since
> the file type is really simple (and set up to be used for textures).
> The ziped, gzipped or arj'ed base package will not be much smaller
> either way.
>
> Erik

Yes you are right, individuals can do it ( translation to png) with their own 
models, ONLY.
As long as we are using ac3d,  rgb remains necessary.
I know that their is a version of ac3d which support png, however we have to 
pay (again) for it.

Cheers


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Erik Hofman]

James Turner wrote:
> On 1 Dec 2008, at 11:03, Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:
> 
>> For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
>> png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
>> tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest  
>> textures.
> 
> An automatic script, that runs over the entire repository, is clearly  
> the way to go here. I prototyped such a thing myself, but wasn't  
> confident enough in my ability to update the .xml files to point to  
> foo/blah/image.png instead of foo/blah/image.rgb - it needs some work  
> by someone more familiar with regexps than I claim to be :)

I don't aprove anyone to update my models to use png instead of rgb 
since it I still use an old version af ac3d that only supports rgb files.

I see little use for changing to png anyhow since it only saves some 
bytes when the base package is extracted but it adds loading speed since 
the file type is really simple (and set up to be used for textures).
The ziped, gzipped or arj'ed base package will not be much smaller 
either way.

Erik

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Melchior FRANZ]

* Vivian Meazza -- Monday 01 December 2008:
> Updating the .xml files is not what is required - it is 
> the .ac files which need updating to the new textures.

Only if you totally ignore "material" animations which are
necessary for livery switching.

In the real world both *.ac and *.xml must get adapted.

m.   :-P

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Vivian Meazza wrote:
> James Turner
>
> > On 1 Dec 2008, at 11:03, Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:
> > > For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
> > > png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
> > > tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest
> > > textures.
> >
> > An automatic script, that runs over the entire repository, is clearly
> > the way to go here. I prototyped such a thing myself, but wasn't
> > confident enough in my ability to update the .xml files to point to
> > foo/blah/image.png instead of foo/blah/image.rgb - it needs some work
> > by someone more familiar with regexps than I claim to be :)
>
> Updating the .xml files is not what is required - it is the .ac files which
> need updating to the new textures.
>
> Vivian
>
>
Yes we are sure that it don't need rotation and, or mirroring
 a replace from ".rgb"   to ".png"
should do the work


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Vivian Meazza]

James Turner

> 
> On 1 Dec 2008, at 11:03, Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:
> 
> > For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
> > png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
> > tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest
> > textures.
> 
> An automatic script, that runs over the entire repository, is clearly
> the way to go here. I prototyped such a thing myself, but wasn't
> confident enough in my ability to update the .xml files to point to
> foo/blah/image.png instead of foo/blah/image.rgb - it needs some work
> by someone more familiar with regexps than I claim to be :)
> 

Updating the .xml files is not what is required - it is the .ac files which
need updating to the new textures.

Vivian 



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Detlef Faber wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 30.11.2008, 23:23 +0100 schrieb gerard robin:
> > On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > > Durk Talsma wrote:
> > > > I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear
> > > > 1.9 release on my webserver:
> > > >
> > > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> > >
> > > Thanks!
> > >
> > > > Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on
> > > > various suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm
> > > > concerned - this selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut
> > > > down the total number of aircraft in the base package, yet preserve
> > > > the variety in feature richness that we originally had. Based on
> > > > this, I came to the following list:
> > > >
> > > > 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> > > > B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> > > > bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> > > > c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> > > > dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> > > > Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> > > > Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> > > > F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it
> > > > is very well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> > > > CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> > > > SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> > > > UFO : Classified
> > > > Zeppelin NT : Airship
> > > > Zero: WW-II Fighter
> > >
> > > The lack of a helicopter seems like an omission.
> > >
> > > I note that the base package size above is 200MB.
> > >
> > > I did a quick look at the (uncompressed) size in KB of
> > > each of these aircraft, excluding the CVS directories.
> > >
> > > 5564777-200
> > > 6208b1900d
> > > 13528   bocian
> > > 17708   c172p
> > > 6752dhc2
> > > 20656   Concorde
> > > 876 Dragonfly
> > > 29428   f-14b
> > > 4360CitationX
> > > 14464   sopwithCamel
> > > 232 ufo
> > > 2148ZLT-NT
> > > 3968A6M2
> > >
> > > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge planes.
> > > I would suggest: - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very
> > > advanced for new users. - Replace the Sopwith Camel with the Stampe.
> > > The Stampe is much easier to fly, and saves us 6.5MB - Look at reducing
> > > the size of the c172p. The Liveries directory is 9MB, and each
> > > tailplane texture is currently 1MB. - Adding the bo105. This means we
> > > have a helicopter, and the aircraft is only 3MB in size.
> > >
> > > -Stuart
> >
> > The size and the easy to fly is a question  :)
> >
> > Since the models  are  more and more accurate, since FlightGear is more
> > and more realistic, don't we must answer to the quality first,  before to
> > answer to some "game" specifications.
> > For instance, yes, the Stampe is easy to fly but not realistic regarding 
> > the FDM.
> > Don't forget  we don't make a Game.
>
> So what is it you are critizising? What needs to be improved to get
> realistic behaviour? Making Aircraft is really hard if the only feedback
> you get is "not realistic".
>
> Don't get me wrong, I think an Aircraft developer should be highly
> interested in criticism and feedback to improve an Aircraft and fellow
> developers shouldn't hesitate to note what they think is inappropriate.
> At least it leads to discussion.
>
>
> Greetings
>
> > Cheers

This could be the content of an other topic, and my answer won't be 
constructive:
Because I don't know YASim , and what can be done with it.
I don't criticism, only a fact, => the feeling that we had on board of a 
stampe ( but, the open cockpit which cannot be reproduced  :) ), was an 
aircraft difficult to pilot, more than a c172 or at that time a JoDel ( the 
ancestor of the Robin).
It was not easy.

To propose it in a base package because it is easy to fly, is not a good idea.
If we are looking for a model easy to fly, we must at least, take an aircraft 
which is/was easy to fly in the real life.

Regards


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On lundi 01 décembre 2008, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:28:53 +, James wrote in message
>
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > On 30 Nov 2008, at 19:08, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge
> > > planes. I would suggest:
> > > - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for
> > > new users.
> >
> > Sadly agreed - like the SR-71, it's prominent enough in screenshots
> > that people will know about it regardless, but it's not the most
> > forgiving of flying experiences.
>
> ..are we trying to be forgiving or realistic?  Crashing the SR-71
> because it's hard to fly, is a feature (of it), not a bug. ;o)

Though, if we are talking about the SR71-Blackbird model, i can say ( since i 
am the author) that it is up to now only a toy, not a realistic model 
aircraft.
>
> > > - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the
> > > aircraft is only 3MB in size.
>
> ..amen.



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Turner]

On 1 Dec 2008, at 11:03, Alexis Bory - xiii wrote:

> For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
> png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
> tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest  
> textures.

An automatic script, that runs over the entire repository, is clearly  
the way to go here. I prototyped such a thing myself, but wasn't  
confident enough in my ability to update the .xml files to point to  
foo/blah/image.png instead of foo/blah/image.rgb - it needs some work  
by someone more familiar with regexps than I claim to be :)



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Alexis Bory - xiii]

Yon Uriarte wrote:
>  Hi,
>
>  On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Stuart Buchanan
>  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>  > wrote:
>
>  >I note that the base package size above is 200MB.

>  We can reduce the on-disk plane footprint.
>
>  I did a quick test compressing f-14b/Models/common2.rgb (texture
>  atlas with fuselage skin, it seems):

Hi, thanks for your comments,
I'm currently switching the main liveries files to png, this could be
committed as soon as I receive the last texture change from
Flyingtoaster. (The f-14b livery switching is fixed, at least here
on my system).
For the remaining .rgb files, yes it's also possible to switch them to
png though it's going to be a huge commiting work as the f-14 use
tenth of different textures. I'll try beginning with the biggest textures.

Greetings,

Alexis

PS: the f-14b and its authors are happy to be candidate to the Top10.
I and Flyingtoaster (the main author) would like to thank all of the
Tomcat supporters.


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Yon Uriarte]

Hi,
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 8:08 PM, Stuart Buchanan <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I note that the base package size above is 200MB.
>
> I did a quick look at the (uncompressed) size in KB of
> each of these aircraft, excluding the CVS directories.
>
> 5564777-200
> 6208b1900d
> 13528   bocian
> 17708   c172p
> 6752dhc2
> 20656   Concorde
> 876 Dragonfly
> 29428   f-14b
> 4360CitationX
> 14464   sopwithCamel
> 232 ufo
> 2148ZLT-NT
> 3968A6M2
>

We can reduce the on-disk plane footprint.

I did a quick test compressing f-14b/Models/common2.rgb (texture atlas with
fuselage skin, it seems):

baseline common2.rgb: 792k
png common2.png: 295k (irfanview, best png compression, keep transparent
color ON)
ziped common2.zip: 375k (winrar .rgb, best zip compression)
rared common2.rar: 353k (winrar .rgb, best rar compression)

  So there seems to be a case for converting all .rgb to .png. It should
result in a smaller distribution and
a smaller disk footprint (possibly quicker loading 1st time loading). It is
my naive understanding that the
references to .rgb should only be in .xml and .ac files.
  A quick shell script could find all .rgb convert them to .png, do a search
replace on .xml and .ac files and
then commit to cvs.

  Also i looked into a .AC file to confirm they are text and a /bin/sed
search replace is possible.
My 1 sample size research file f-14b.ac is 2485k uncompressed, 337k
compressed as rar
(winrar, best rar compression). I would even expect gzip to achieve a better
compression ratio.
Again, it should be possible to compress all .ac, either as a pre-pass
on installer generation or to commit it to cvs. The OSG AC loader may need
patching to load .gz files, I ignore if
the osg loader can do the gz streaming itself on all supported file types.


greetings,
 yon
-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Vivian Meazza]

> -Original Message-
> From: AJ MacLeod [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 01 December 2008 09:06
> To: FlightGear developers discussions
> Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate
> 
> On Monday 01 December 2008 08:59:19 James Sleeman wrote:
> 
> > I admit I am not a Camel expert :-)
> Nor me, though Vivian and I did an awful lot of reading at the time...
> 
> > I guess I always think of a Camel as having a Gnome in front, which has
> > no throttle at all as I recall and as such blipping was the order of the
> > day.  Certainly other engines installed were throttle-able in a fashion.
> > Now I look closer though I see in the Camel's help.xml it does have a
> > blip switch, but still the throttle throttles, so I guess it's modelled
> > with one of those other engines :-)
> 
> Correct :-)  Not that this excuses the poor sound of course ;-)
> 

The lever on the left of the Gnome-engined Camel cockpit might look like a
throttle, but in fact is more properly a fuel control lever, which was used
during starting and for small speed adjustments in flight. While we have
modelled the blip switch, which was used to control engine speed in the
approach, it is also true to say that we haven't completely correctly
modelled the action of the "throttle" in the FDM. Perhaps we could do more
work on this, but I'm not sure anyone would notice the subtle difference. 

On the other hand the Bentley-engined Camel did have a proper throttle, a
push-pull lever on the right of the panel. We probably model the action of
this engine more accurately than the Gnome whose cockpit we portray. AJ and
I did discuss this issue a while back, and then got immersed in other
issues.  

Of course, the Camel was difficult to fly in RL as in the Sim, and perhaps
we don't want to make it any more difficult.

Vivian



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Stuart Buchanan]

James Turner wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2008, at 22:23, gerard robin wrote:
> 
> > For instance, yes, the Stampe is easy to fly but not realistic  
> > regarding  the FDM.
> > Don't forget  we don't make a Game.

I think the Stampe has fairly good FDM. From my limited experience,
it flies as described here: 

http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepStampe.html

I am quite aware that we do not make a game. I've actually used 
FG for some cross-country flight planning in real life 
- it was useful to be able to visualize the terrain prior to flying it.

> But equally, the C172, and the 777 handle 'predictably'. Giving new  
> users aircraft which they might *want* to fly, but which are difficult  
> to fly (without, for example, reading a tutorial) are not the best  
> choice for the base package. Concorde and the P51-d are both in this  
> category I think - they have excellent, well-developed and complete  
> models, but neither are a great choice for a new user to pick up and  
> get into the air with. They will produce lots of 'I tried FG, but all  
> I do is crash and crash and crash' feedback. Unlike other sims we have  
> no 'easy' mode in terms of FDM realism to solve this. (And look at all  
> the P-factor feedback even in the C172)

Exactly my thoughts.

The Concorde may have changed since I last tried it, but as I recall, it
starts with quite limited fuel. This is appropriate for a landing, but means
that it runs out after about 15 minutes on full throttle/afterburner. A new 
user is likely to load the Concorde from the launcher, take off on full 
throttle, 
fly around of 10 minutes annd then run out of fuel without realizing it and 
crash. They won't have read the README file, noticed the Flight Engineer 
view, or understood the fuel dials, fuel transfer system, advanced autopilot 
etc.

Flying the Concorde well requires a lot of study and effort. A completely
new user of FG needs to be offered a set of aircraft that they can have a
positive experience flying. Once we've got them hooked, they will then be
prepared to put the time into flying the challenging planes like the Concorde.

-Stuart



  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Sleeman]

Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> I'm not at my main machine right now, so I can't check, but I think 
> the AN-2 is
> about 30MB in size, so probably a bit big for the base package.
>   
Now I look, it is even bigger (about 48meg by my count), better forget 
the AN-2 suggestion :-)


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Stuart Buchanan]

James wrote:

> A "light sport" aircraft or something close would be good, there is a 
> big gap between the Dragonfly and a 172, this in fact is probably the 
> biggest growth area of aviation these days so seems a shame to skip over 
> it. 
> 
> Likely candidates (one of):
> 
>   Lionceau
>   Skyranger
>   J3

Personally, I've always had a soft spot for the J3 Cub. It doesn't have a 
high-poly model
or an advanced 3D cockpit, bit it something that people with low-spec machines
can run, and it is pretty small (400kb gzipped). It has also been in the base 
package
for as long as I can remember, so provides some continuity.

> Don't know about the Camel, it doesn't have good sound, the wheel chocks 
> don't appear to disappear, having engine throttle is really not 
> realistic etc... I'd prefer the Stampe or AN-2 to be the biplane, both 
> are very nice.

I'm not at my main machine right now, so I can't check, but I think the AN-2 is
about 30MB in size, so probably a bit big for the base package.

-Stuart



  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[AJ MacLeod]

On Monday 01 December 2008 08:59:19 James Sleeman wrote:

> I admit I am not a Camel expert :-)
Nor me, though Vivian and I did an awful lot of reading at the time...

> I guess I always think of a Camel as having a Gnome in front, which has
> no throttle at all as I recall and as such blipping was the order of the
> day.  Certainly other engines installed were throttle-able in a fashion.
> Now I look closer though I see in the Camel's help.xml it does have a
> blip switch, but still the throttle throttles, so I guess it's modelled
> with one of those other engines :-)

Correct :-)  Not that this excuses the poor sound of course ;-)

Cheers,

AJ

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Sleeman]

AJ MacLeod wrote:
> On Monday 01 December 2008 08:32:40 James Sleeman wrote:
>   
>> Don't know about the Camel, ... having engine throttle is really not
>> realistic etc...
>> 
>
> I'd suggest that you do a bit more research on that issue...
>   

I admit I am not a Camel expert :-) 

I guess I always think of a Camel as having a Gnome in front, which has 
no throttle at all as I recall and as such blipping was the order of the 
day.  Certainly other engines installed were throttle-able in a fashion.

Now I look closer though I see in the Camel's help.xml it does have a 
blip switch, but still the throttle throttles, so I guess it's modelled 
with one of those other engines :-)



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

- "AJ MacLeod" a écrit :
> On Monday 01 December 2008 08:32:40 James Sleeman wrote:
> 
> > Don't know about the Camel, ... having engine throttle is really
> not
> > realistic etc...
> 
> I'd suggest that you do a bit more research on that issue...

Do you mean this is a FAQ ?

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/  Photo gallery - album photo
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/   FlightGear Scenery Designer


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[AJ MacLeod]

On Monday 01 December 2008 08:32:40 James Sleeman wrote:

> Don't know about the Camel, ... having engine throttle is really not
> realistic etc...

I'd suggest that you do a bit more research on that issue...

Cheers,

AJ

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Sleeman]

Durk Talsma wrote:
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
>   
[..snip..]
> Zero: WW-II Fighter
>   

A "light sport" aircraft or something close would be good, there is a 
big gap between the Dragonfly and a 172, this in fact is probably the 
biggest growth area of aviation these days so seems a shame to skip over 
it. 

Likely candidates (one of):

  Lionceau
  Skyranger
  J3

Don't know about the Camel, it doesn't have good sound, the wheel chocks 
don't appear to disappear, having engine throttle is really not 
realistic etc... I'd prefer the Stampe or AN-2 to be the biplane, both 
are very nice.


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Detlef Faber]

Am Sonntag, den 30.11.2008, 23:23 +0100 schrieb gerard robin:
> On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > Durk Talsma wrote:
> > > I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9
> > > release on my webserver:
> > >
> > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > > Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various
> > > suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
> > > selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number
> > > of aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature
> > > richness that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following
> > > list:
> > >
> > > 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> > > B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> > > bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> > > c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> > > dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> > > Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> > > Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> > > F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is
> > > very well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> > > CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> > > SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> > > UFO : Classified
> > > Zeppelin NT : Airship
> > > Zero: WW-II Fighter
> >
> > The lack of a helicopter seems like an omission.
> >
> > I note that the base package size above is 200MB.
> >
> > I did a quick look at the (uncompressed) size in KB of
> > each of these aircraft, excluding the CVS directories.
> >
> > 5564777-200
> > 6208b1900d
> > 13528   bocian
> > 17708   c172p
> > 6752dhc2
> > 20656   Concorde
> > 876 Dragonfly
> > 29428   f-14b
> > 4360CitationX
> > 14464   sopwithCamel
> > 232 ufo
> > 2148ZLT-NT
> > 3968A6M2
> >
> > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge planes. I
> > would suggest: - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced
> > for new users. - Replace the Sopwith Camel with the Stampe. The Stampe is
> > much easier to fly, and saves us 6.5MB - Look at reducing the size of the
> > c172p. The Liveries directory is 9MB, and each tailplane texture is
> > currently 1MB. - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the
> > aircraft is only 3MB in size.
> >
> > -Stuart
> >
> >
> 
> The size and the easy to fly is a question  :)
> 
> Since the models  are  more and more accurate, since FlightGear is more and 
> more realistic, don't we must answer to the quality first,  before to answer 
> to some "game" specifications.
> For instance, yes, the Stampe is easy to fly but not realistic regarding  the 
> FDM. 
> Don't forget  we don't make a Game.
> 
So what is it you are critizising? What needs to be improved to get
realistic behaviour? Making Aircraft is really hard if the only feedback
you get is "not realistic".

Don't get me wrong, I think an Aircraft developer should be highly
interested in criticism and feedback to improve an Aircraft and fellow
developers shouldn't hesitate to note what they think is inappropriate.
At least it leads to discussion.


Greetings

> Cheers
> 
> 
> 
-- 
Detlef Faber

http://www.sol2500.net/flightgear



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Syd]

Anders Gidenstam wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Durk Talsma wrote:
>
>   
>> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various
>> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
>> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number of
>> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature richness
>> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
>> ..
>> Zeppelin NT : Airship
>> ..
>> 
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm very happy to see my airship in the proposed base package :).
>
> There are some minor snags, though: It currently depends on some files 
> provided by other aircraft. Most of them are instrument related, 
> primarily the PFD, which isn't the right model for this aircraft but a lot 
> better than having none at all.
>
> Here is a summary of the dependencies:
>
> Aircraft/CitationX
>Nasal/flightdirector.nas,Nasal/Primus1000.nas,Nasal/rmu.nas,
>Models/Instruments/PFD/*,
>Models/Instruments/fmc.*
> Aircraft/Citation-Bravo
>Models/Instruments/dme.*
> Aircraft/Submarine_Scout
>Models/mp_broadcast.nas
>
> Fortunately the CitationX is in the proposed base package, so it's only 
> the DME instrument and the broadcast module I'll need to add.
>
> There are also some unnecessary instruments in 
> Aircraft/ZLT-NT/DualControl/Instruments/
> that could be removed to save space and potential confusion. (The 
> DualControl directory contains all instruments I had made dual control 
> enabled and not just those used in the Zeppelin NT.)
>
> Cheers,
>
> Anders
>   
This always makes me nervous when people do that.
I'm about to move an updated version of the Primus1000 to 
Instruments-3d because it get confusing to keep copying updates back and 
forth between the two.So it might be safer to use that instead. It might 
be a day or two away still.

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Arnt Karlsen]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008 19:28:53 +, James wrote in message 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

> 
> On 30 Nov 2008, at 19:08, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> 
> > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge  
> > planes. I would suggest:
> > - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for
> > new users.
> 
> Sadly agreed - like the SR-71, it's prominent enough in screenshots  
> that people will know about it regardless, but it's not the most  
> forgiving of flying experiences.

..are we trying to be forgiving or realistic?  Crashing the SR-71
because it's hard to fly, is a feature (of it), not a bug. ;o)

> > - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the  
> > aircraft is only 3MB in size.

..amen. 


-- 
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;o)
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
  Scenarios always come in sets of three: 
  best case, worst case, and just in case.

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Syd]

While I think you have the right to 'refuse' the 777

of course  :) , but I wasn't refusing ,  just my own vote  because it 
seems to have issues on a few systems



-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Matthew Tippett]

I agree.  The initial offering from flightgear is fundamentally only
for Windows - the expectation under Linux is that the packages will be
rolled into distributions.

For the aircraft, I would suggest something akin to -base, -realistic,
-fun.  That would appeal to the different classes of user.  It also
sends a clear unambigous packaging suggestion to the distribution
packages.

Regards... Matthew


On 11/30/08, Stefan Seifert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday, 30. November 2008, Heiko Schulz wrote:
>> > Which format "zip" isn't it MS windows
>> > format.   ?
>> >
>> >  And what about "tar.gz"  format which is a
>> > standard too  :)
>>
>> .zip is mainly used on Win but it can also opened on Linux and Mac.
>> But tar.gz can be used also on win but can be opened on win with the
>> OpenSource program 7-zip.
>>
>> Tar.gz compresses IMHO much better, so we should use that.
>
> I think the question is not about the archive format itself, but about the
> contents. That is for example if all the contents are in a folder already or
> unpack directly into the current directory.
>
> Stefan
>
> -
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great
> prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Turner]

On 30 Nov 2008, at 22:59, Stefan Seifert wrote:

> I think the question is not about the archive format itself, but  
> about the
> contents. That is for example if all the contents are in a folder  
> already or
> unpack directly into the current directory.

Right - I mean agreeing the name of the dirs and conventions so an  
automatic tool can install / update / patch an 'aircraft zip' reliably  
and without user intervention.

Anyway, that's a discussion for another day.

James


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Stefan Seifert]

On Sunday, 30. November 2008, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> > Which format "zip" isn't it MS windows
> > format.   ?
> >
> >  And what about "tar.gz"  format which is a
> > standard too  :)
>
> .zip is mainly used on Win but it can also opened on Linux and Mac.
> But tar.gz can be used also on win but can be opened on win with the
> OpenSource program 7-zip.
>
> Tar.gz compresses IMHO much better, so we should use that.

I think the question is not about the archive format itself, but about the 
contents. That is for example if all the contents are in a folder already or 
unpack directly into the current directory.

Stefan

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, Heiko Schulz wrote:
> Hi,
>
> we have still the 787 and in the forum is a much better version floating.
>
> The 777-200 is very nice, but the main things are not working properly in
> the cockpit and that's a mustbe for base-package IMHO! By the way Syd
> disagree a comit to the base-package so qwe should regard this!
>
> > I (sadly) agree, the Concorde is bigger then I realized and
> > we also do
> > need a heli included by default (I myself prefer the EC135)
>
> The EC135 is under heaviliy developement. The fdm is lacking though it is
> easy to fly, but the Bo105 is more realistic. I vote again against the
> EC135!
>
> Cheers
> HHS
>
>
Like the Concorde
It will take several centuries  before we would have a  better helo than the 
bo105   :)
Yes i vote for it because it is not a toy.



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Heiko Schulz]

> Which format "zip" isn't it MS windows
> format.   ?
> 
>  And what about "tar.gz"  format which is a
> standard too  :) 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Gérard

.zip is mainly used on Win but it can also opened on Linux and Mac.
But tar.gz can be used also on win but can be opened on win with the OpenSource 
program 7-zip.

Tar.gz compresses IMHO much better, so we should use that.

Cheers
HHS


  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Heiko Schulz]

Hi,

we have still the 787 and in the forum is a much better version floating.

The 777-200 is very nice, but the main things are not working properly in the 
cockpit and that's a mustbe for base-package IMHO!
By the way Syd disagree a comit to the base-package so qwe should regard this!

> 
> I (sadly) agree, the Concorde is bigger then I realized and
> we also do 
> need a heli included by default (I myself prefer the EC135)

The EC135 is under heaviliy developement. The fdm is lacking though it is easy 
to fly, but the Bo105 is more realistic.
I vote again against the EC135!

Cheers
HHS


  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, James Turner wrote:

SNIP
> finding and downloading them. (Not to say aircraft installation
> couldn't be made easier - I've love to standardise the .zip format for
> aircraft so we could automatically unpack them into data/Aircraft from
> the GUI front-ends)
>
> James
>

Which format "zip" isn't it MS windows format.   ?

 And what about "tar.gz"  format which is a standard too  :) 


-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Michael Smith]

James Turner wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2008, at 20:01, Syd wrote:
>
>   
>> I'd have to vote against including the 777-200ER , there are  
>> apparently
>> some issues with text not displaying on the glass cockpit with some
>> cards, which I'm currently trying to solve ...
>> 
>
> While I think you have the right to 'refuse' the 777, I would say it  
> is the most complete transport-category jet we have, so it should  
> stay. The A320, 747-400, 787 and 737 are all being worked on, or of  
> good quality already, but your recent work on the 777 puts it ahead of  
> all of them (in my opinion) I'm sure there's many things you'd like to  
> improve, but I think that's the nature of development.
>
> Just my opinion of course.
>
> James
>
> -
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>
>   
Well, I don't have the problem myself but for the people that do, the 
777 won't be that detailed/realistic because a lot of the detailed 
cockpit insturments are Null.

I (sadly) agree, the Concorde is bigger then I realized and we also do 
need a heli included by default (I myself prefer the EC135)

Just my two cents.

-- 
Michael Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (mdsmith2)


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Turner]

On 30 Nov 2008, at 22:23, gerard robin wrote:

> For instance, yes, the Stampe is easy to fly but not realistic  
> regarding  the
> FDM.
> Don't forget  we don't make a Game.

But equally, the C172, and the 777 handle 'predictably'. Giving new  
users aircraft which they might *want* to fly, but which are difficult  
to fly (without, for example, reading a tutorial) are not the best  
choice for the base package. Concorde and the P51-d are both in this  
category I think - they have excellent, well-developed and complete  
models, but neither are a great choice for a new user to pick up and  
get into the air with. They will produce lots of 'I tried FG, but all  
I do is crash and crash and crash' feedback. Unlike other sims we have  
no 'easy' mode in terms of FDM realism to solve this. (And look at all  
the P-factor feedback even in the C172)

In contrast, in the Citation or 777, and with sufficient runway, one  
can more or less push the throttle and go. It's not a realistic way to  
fly, but it is the first thing many new users will do. The ones  
seeking a realistic P51 or Concorde simulation will have no trouble  
finding and downloading them. (Not to say aircraft installation  
couldn't be made easier - I've love to standardise the .zip format for  
aircraft so we could automatically unpack them into data/Aircraft from  
the GUI front-ends)

James


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> Durk Talsma wrote:
> > I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9
> > release on my webserver:
> >
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
>
> Thanks!
>
> > Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various
> > suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
> > selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number
> > of aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature
> > richness that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following
> > list:
> >
> > 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> > B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> > bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> > c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> > dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> > Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> > Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> > F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is
> > very well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> > CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> > SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> > UFO : Classified
> > Zeppelin NT : Airship
> > Zero: WW-II Fighter
>
> The lack of a helicopter seems like an omission.
>
> I note that the base package size above is 200MB.
>
> I did a quick look at the (uncompressed) size in KB of
> each of these aircraft, excluding the CVS directories.
>
> 5564777-200
> 6208b1900d
> 13528   bocian
> 17708   c172p
> 6752dhc2
> 20656   Concorde
> 876 Dragonfly
> 29428   f-14b
> 4360CitationX
> 14464   sopwithCamel
> 232 ufo
> 2148ZLT-NT
> 3968A6M2
>
> As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge planes. I
> would suggest: - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced
> for new users. - Replace the Sopwith Camel with the Stampe. The Stampe is
> much easier to fly, and saves us 6.5MB - Look at reducing the size of the
> c172p. The Liveries directory is 9MB, and each tailplane texture is
> currently 1MB. - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the
> aircraft is only 3MB in size.
>
> -Stuart
>
>

The size and the easy to fly is a question  :)

Since the models  are  more and more accurate, since FlightGear is more and 
more realistic, don't we must answer to the quality first,  before to answer 
to some "game" specifications.
For instance, yes, the Stampe is easy to fly but not realistic regarding  the 
FDM. 
Don't forget  we don't make a Game.

Cheers



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Turner]

On 30 Nov 2008, at 20:01, Syd wrote:

> I'd have to vote against including the 777-200ER , there are  
> apparently
> some issues with text not displaying on the glass cockpit with some
> cards, which I'm currently trying to solve ...

While I think you have the right to 'refuse' the 777, I would say it  
is the most complete transport-category jet we have, so it should  
stay. The A320, 747-400, 787 and 737 are all being worked on, or of  
good quality already, but your recent work on the 777 puts it ahead of  
all of them (in my opinion) I'm sure there's many things you'd like to  
improve, but I think that's the nature of development.

Just my opinion of course.

James

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Anders Gidenstam]

On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Durk Talsma wrote:

> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number of
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature richness
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
> ..
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> ..

Hi,

I'm very happy to see my airship in the proposed base package :).

There are some minor snags, though: It currently depends on some files 
provided by other aircraft. Most of them are instrument related, 
primarily the PFD, which isn't the right model for this aircraft but a lot 
better than having none at all.

Here is a summary of the dependencies:

Aircraft/CitationX
   Nasal/flightdirector.nas,Nasal/Primus1000.nas,Nasal/rmu.nas,
   Models/Instruments/PFD/*,
   Models/Instruments/fmc.*
Aircraft/Citation-Bravo
   Models/Instruments/dme.*
Aircraft/Submarine_Scout
   Models/mp_broadcast.nas

Fortunately the CitationX is in the proposed base package, so it's only 
the DME instrument and the broadcast module I'll need to add.

There are also some unnecessary instruments in 
Aircraft/ZLT-NT/DualControl/Instruments/
that could be removed to save space and potential confusion. (The 
DualControl directory contains all instruments I had made dual control 
enabled and not just those used in the Zeppelin NT.)

Cheers,

Anders
-- 
---
Anders Gidenstam
WWW: http://www.gidenstam.org/FlightGear/

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Durk Talsma]

Hi Stuart,

On Sunday 30 November 2008 20:08:12 Stuart Buchanan wrote:
>
> The lack of a helicopter seems like an omission.
>

The bo105 is actually in the base package. It looks like it just dropped out 
of the list I posted.

More comments later.

Cheers,
Durk

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Syd]

Durk Talsma wrote:
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
>
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
>
>
> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various 
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this 
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number of 
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature richness 
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
>
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is very 
> well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> UFO : Classified
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> Zero: WW-II Fighter
>
> Comments are welcome
>
> Cheers,
> Durk
>
> -
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>
>   
I'd have to vote against including the 777-200ER , there are apparently 
some issues with text not displaying on the glass cockpit with some 
cards, which I'm currently trying to solve ...

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, James Turner wrote:
> On 30 Nov 2008, at 19:08, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> > As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge
> > planes. I would suggest:
> > - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for new
> > users.
>
> Sadly agreed - like the SR-71, it's prominent enough in screenshots
> that people will know about it regardless, but it's not the most
> forgiving of flying experiences.


I agree ,  Concorde but nothing  :)  
We are still waiting for an other similar aircraft which could be so 
realistic.
>
> > - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the
> > aircraft is only 3MB in size.
>
> ++.
>
> James
>
>

-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Bohnert Paul]

--- On Sun, 11/30/08, Durk Talsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Durk Talsma <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate
> To: "FlightGear developers discussions" 
> 
> Date: Sunday, November 30, 2008, 11:15 AM
> Hi Everybody,
> 
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending
> FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
> 
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> 
> 
> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was
> based on various 
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm
> concerned - this 
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut
> down the total number of 
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in
> feature richness 
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the
> following list:
> 
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo
> Prop.
> bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing
> Capability
> Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many
> features, it is very 
> well capable of representing the category "Fighter
> Jet"
> CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> UFO : Classified
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> Zero: WW-II Fighter
> 
> Comments are welcome
> 
> Cheers,
> Durk
> 
> -
> This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move
> Developer's challenge
> Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK
> & win great prizes
> Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event
> anywhere in the world
> http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
> ___
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Hi all,

I downw loaded the source from the above links.

I was able to build and install SimGear-1.99.5.

FlightGear-1.99.5 configurations stops with the following error.

config.status: creating utils/fgadmin/Makefile
config.status: creating utils/fgadmin/src/Makefile
config.status: creating utils/js_server/Makefile
config.status: creating utils/Modeller/Makefile
config.status: error: cannot find input file: utils/propmerge/Makefile.in

Building on Linux Fedora 8.

I am able to build SimGear and FlightGear CVS.

Best Regards,

Paul B
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[James Turner]

On 30 Nov 2008, at 19:08, Stuart Buchanan wrote:

> As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge  
> planes. I would suggest:
> - Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for new  
> users.

Sadly agreed - like the SR-71, it's prominent enough in screenshots  
that people will know about it regardless, but it's not the most  
forgiving of flying experiences.

> - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the  
> aircraft is only 3MB in size.

++.

James


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Heiko Schulz]

Hi,


> - Look at reducing the size of the c172p. The Liveries
> directory is 9MB, and each tailplane texture is currently
> 1MB.
> - Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and
> the aircraft is only 3MB in size.
> 
> -Stuart

the c172p is now my part and with the next update this week the most textures 
will be converted to png!

The Bo105 was always part of the base package and IMHO it should be also this 
time! (realistic fdm, easy to learn, nice nasal features!)

Regards
HHS


  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Stuart Buchanan]

Durk Talsma wrote:

> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
> 
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2

Thanks!

> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various 
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this 
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number of 
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature richness 
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
> 
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is very 
> well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> UFO : Classified
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> Zero: WW-II Fighter

The lack of a helicopter seems like an omission.

I note that the base package size above is 200MB.

I did a quick look at the (uncompressed) size in KB of 
each of these aircraft, excluding the CVS directories. 

5564777-200
6208b1900d
13528   bocian
17708   c172p
6752dhc2
20656   Concorde
876 Dragonfly
29428   f-14b
4360CitationX
14464   sopwithCamel
232 ufo
2148ZLT-NT
3968A6M2

As can be seen, there is a huge variation, and some pretty huge planes. I would 
suggest:
- Dropping Concorde It is very nice, but also very advanced for new users.
- Replace the Sopwith Camel with the Stampe. The Stampe is much easier to fly, 
and saves us 6.5MB
- Look at reducing the size of the c172p. The Liveries directory is 9MB, and 
each tailplane texture is currently 1MB.
- Adding the bo105. This means we have a helicopter, and the aircraft is only 
3MB in size.

-Stuart


  

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Durk Talsma]

Hi Ron,

On Sunday 30 November 2008 18:43:43 Ron Jensen wrote:
> Erik just synced JSBSim about 7 hours before this message.  Did those
> updates make it into the release candidate?
>

Yes, I did a full cvs up about three hours before rolling up the tarfiles, so 
I guess these latest JSBSim changes are included. 

Cheers,
Durk

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Durk Talsma]

Hi Fred,

On Sunday 30 November 2008 18:25:46 Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> Durk Talsma a écrit :
> > Hi Everybody,
> >
> > I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9
> > release on my webserver:
> >
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
>
> The version number is quite confusing. Would it be 1.9 or 1.99.5 . Maybe
> this snapshot should be labeled 1.99.5-rc1 ?
>
> -Fred

Well, Curt has started with the 1.99 series, and is working on setting up an 
automated snapshot release, so this is how we got to the 1.99.5 version 
number. I asked whether adding an "rc" postfix would be breaking this, which 
it apparently doesn't. There are some issues with version number checking, 
according to Curt, so I decided to be a bit reluctant to touch the exsiting 
version numbers at all. Maybe I should change that for the next release 
candidate...

Cheers.
Durk

-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[gerard robin]

On dimanche 30 novembre 2008, Ron Jensen wrote:
> On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 18:15 +0100, Durk Talsma wrote:
> > Hi Everybody,
> >
> > I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9
> > release on my webserver:
> >
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> > http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> >
> >
> > Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various
> > suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this
> > selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number
> > of aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature
> > richness that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following
> > list:
> >
> > 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> > B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> > bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> > c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> > dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> > Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> > Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> > F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is
> > very well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> > CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> > SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> > UFO : Classified
> > Zeppelin NT : Airship
> > Zero: WW-II Fighter
> >
> > Comments are welcome
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Durk
>
> Erik just synced JSBSim about 7 hours before this message.  Did those
> updates make it into the release candidate?
>

And the A6M Zero may want the Carrier Hook  feature is fully operational 
within JSBSim.



-- 
Gérard
http://pagesperso-orange.fr/GRTux/

J'ai décidé d'être heureux parce que c'est bon pour la santé. 
Voltaire


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Ron Jensen]

On Sun, 2008-11-30 at 18:15 +0100, Durk Talsma wrote:
> Hi Everybody,
> 
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
> 
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/FlightGear-data-1.99.5.tar.bz2
> 
> 
> Please note that I made an aircraft selection that was based on various 
> suggestions made on the list, but that -as far as I'm concerned - this 
> selection is not yet final. I've been trying to cut down the total number of 
> aircraft in the base package, yet preserve the variety in feature richness 
> that we originally had. Based on this, I came to the following list:
> 
> 777ER   : Fairly Complete Airliner
> B1900d  : Very complete Commuter jet, Twin Turbo Prop.
> bocian  : Our most complete SailPlane
> c17p: Light Single GA; our default aircraft
> dhc2: Versatile Tail Dagger, with Aerotowing Capability
> Concorde: Supersonic Transport
> Dragonfly   : Nice ultralight.
> F14 : Omnipowerful Jet Fighter; has so many features, it is very 
> well capable of representing the category "Fighter Jet"
> CitationX   : Small Commuter Jet
> SopwithCamel: Historic Aircraft
> UFO : Classified
> Zeppelin NT : Airship
> Zero: WW-II Fighter
> 
> Comments are welcome
> 
> Cheers,
> Durk


Erik just synced JSBSim about 7 hours before this message.  Did those
updates make it into the release candidate?


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear 1.99.5: Release Candidate

[Frederic Bouvier]

Durk Talsma a écrit :
> Hi Everybody,
>
> I just placed the sources and base package for the pending FlightGear 1.9 
> release on my webserver:
>
> http://durktalsmal.xs4all.nl/SimGear-1.99.5.tar.gz
>   

The version number is quite confusing. Would it be 1.9 or 1.99.5 . Maybe
this snapshot should be labeled 1.99.5-rc1 ?

-Fred

-- 
Frédéric Bouvier
http://my.fotolia.com/frfoto/   Photo gallery
http://fgsd.sourceforge.net/FlightGear Scenery Designer


-
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel