Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Usability

2012-08-12 Thread James Turner
On 11 Aug 2012, at 22:52, Martin Spott wrote: 3) Scenery. Terrasync is now built into FG, and we have nice UI to configure it in-sim. However, it still requires users to set up a separate directory and configure FG_SCENERY before it can be used. It would be great if the standard

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Usability

2012-08-12 Thread Martin Spott
James Turner wrote: Usability was the main reason for making terrasync be available as in-process option, and I'm strongly considering doing the same thing for fgcom, although that has a few extra complications. Whereas there's little use of TerraSync without the FG flight sim, there are

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Usability

2012-08-12 Thread Stefan Seifert
On Sunday 12 August 2012 16:07:18 Martin Spott wrote: Whereas there's little use of TerraSync without the FG flight sim, there are plausible usage scenarios for FGCom _without_ FlightGear, let's say for ATC. Therefore, while it makes sense to package FGCom alongside with FlightGear for the

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Usability

2012-08-12 Thread ys
Hi James Am 12.08.2012 um 17:48 schrieb James Turner zakal...@mac.com: On 11 Aug 2012, at 22:52, Martin Spott wrote: 3) Scenery. Terrasync is now built into FG, and we have nice UI to configure it in-sim. However, it still requires users to set up a separate directory and configure

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FlightGear Usability

2012-08-12 Thread Martin Spott
Stefan Seifert wrote: On Sunday 12 August 2012 16:07:18 Martin Spott wrote: Whereas there's little use of TerraSync without the FG flight sim, there are plausible usage scenarios for FGCom _without_ FlightGear, let's say for ATC. Therefore, while it makes sense to package FGCom alongside