> I'm not sure this is necessary. I think an opt-in checkbox would
> suffice. After all FlightGear has been around for personal experiments
> for a very long time. So why not this option.
I don't mind leaving it - the rational for deleting it is that the texture
sheets take up space and download
__
> Od: "Arnt Karlsen"
> Komu:
> Datum: 31.01.2013 02:15
> Předmět: Re: [Flightgear-devel] Textures bug
>
>On Sat, 26 Jan 2013 16:18:14 +0100, mer...@centrum.cz wrote in message
><20130126161814.7b021...@centrum.cz>:
>
>> Hello,
>> wit
Hi THorsten,
On 02/16/2013 09:13 AM, Renk Thorsten wrote:
> So, let me just try to explain better, because we do have a case study to see
> what's likely to happen next.
I really want to respond to all this but I feel I'm not really entitled
to because I did little coding for FlightGear the p
Am 15.02.2013 16:16, schrieb Torsten Dreyer:
> If no one shouts out loudly _NOW_, I'm going to tag the release branches
> tomorrow (Saturday) morning (Central European Time) and give the package
> managers the GO to build and distribute the bundles. That should give us
> a ready-to-download release
Hy Yves
Sorry, I do not understand your question. Could you clarify, please?
Torsten
Am 16.02.2013 00:17, schrieb ys:
> Hi Torsten
>
> What does mean "no public answer" in this list for this decision ?
>
> -Yves
>
>
>
>
> Am 15.02.2013 um 16:16 schrieb Torsten Dreyer :
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> at one p
Hi Torsten,
De : Torsten Dreyer
Envoyé le : Samedi 16 février 2013 10h48
> There is still one open item:
> To push the final pdf and html documentation to the mapserver site. I do
> not have write access, so may please somebody who knows how to do that
> and
> To my knowledge, this is a fully automated task, which is croned at each
> update. So for the online stuff everything seems to be fine.
> The only thing I do not know is who is taking care to update the
> getstart.pdf files pushed into the installers and tarballs for the release.
Ah, good news.
On 15 Feb 2013, at 23:56, ys wrote:
> Ok, can we have a decision that SimGear/FlightGear is not supporting OSX 10.5
> on intel anymore ? FG 2.8 is doable, and maybe 2.10 with some further tweaks
> too, but after looking to what's coming up with "next" I see that more and
> more tweaks are nee
> Did you test your airfield grass with some of the newer generated terrain
> (LOWI in my case)?
No, I didn't. Shouldn't make a difference for rendering purposes how you
created it, at this stage it's all vertices and pixels and the shaders don't
care where they come from or how they connect.
Hi James
I'm still trying to be this 10.5 person these days, I don't give up that
fast of course ;-) And I spent a lot of time this week in this believe me.
It started with having all dependencies right, and now I'm still trying
to get simgear/flightgear the right way. When I succeed I will nee
Am 16.02.13 18:54, schrieb HB-GRAL:
> I got also the sound working now for 10.5, and I'm actually building a
> FGx 2.10 against SDK 10.5.
The sound problem is not related to 10.5 of course, I got the sound
working for arch i386 and sdk 10.5/6 (x86_64 worked from beginning,
building against sdk 1
Hi James
I guess this is the next commit
https://gitorious.org/fg/simgear/commit/318c5000ce58a07a279053f084a28faaef5c422d
that breaks simgear compilation against osx sdk 10.5 and target 10.5 on
intel (for 2.11, and I get no problems against 10.6):
Output:
simgear/simgear/debug/BufferedLogCallb
Hi Olivier, Stuart,
Current Manual on mapserver is broken at the midstream of section 8.10
(The autopilot).
And I noticed that unintentionally disappeared chapters exist:
Chapter 9, Chapter 10, Chapter 11, Appendix A, Appendix B
Maybe, Olivier's commit to basic.tex 15 hours ago was something
Hi Everyone,
I just wanted to send a quick update on the release process. Feb 17
arrives at different times at different places and it is still Feb 16 here
for another hour. I have uploaded the source and the mac version of the
release to ibiblio.org and the final windows version is being upload
14 matches
Mail list logo
