Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
dene maxwell wrote: I regret any offence I may have caused you. Given that this not the first time I have caused you personal offence. After careful consideration I feel it is prudent that I hang up the keyboard on the developer lists, at least until such time as I can afford hardware that will allow me to provide valid comments in the context of new developments. Posting valid comments does not depend on the hardware that's sitting on your desk. The one thing is about writing comments, the other thing is about running FlightGear. Sure, it eases talking about the current development if you actually can run it, but not being able to run it does not hinder you from posting valid comments - just stick to those areas that you actually _can_ comment on. Look, the computer I use at my desk is being able to run FlightGear at 4 fps as long as I disable every sort of nifty features and place the aircraft at the startup position on a small, flat island (EDWJ) - BTW, this island looks very unrealistic in FG but this is a different topic. This isn't thrilling but at least I can verify if the binary is still compiling and running after the latest changes. I don't claim that I always post valid comments, but at least I _could_ do so if I wanted to Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Hi Chris, I don't disagree with anything you're saying. I don't (and never have) run 3-d cockpits, I believe my hardware setup is too primative to support them. This is not the fault of FG, it is a probelm I am saving up to remedy. You are right; I can't run 3-d cockpits. I run 098a binary and G099 data/0910 scenery but have tried a number of aircraft that have been developed for the 099 binary that won't work or have unpredictable behaviour when using the 098a binary. From: Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 18:47:26 +1300 dene maxwell wrote: Hi Chris, agreed, 3-D is not a 099 peculiarity... but I can't run 3-D cockpits under my implementation of 098a, I've put this down to hardware restrictions and it hasn't been important as there are plenty of options in the way of equally enjoyable aircraft. Some of the new aircraft are designed to run under FGFS 099 and have to have special makes to run under 098a. Again I reiterate this not because they have 3-d cockpits but for other reasons related to the changes from 098a to 099 (JBSim 2.0 and the changes to the FDM for example) Sorry, I'm feeling really slow (probably because it's late where I am, and I should go to sleep). There was a change in JSBSim configuration file format in going to JSBSim 2.0; that has caused a lot of aircraft that haven't yet been updated to not run under FG 0.9.9, and still others that *have* been updated to not run under earlier versions (although one can always hang on to an old version, I guess). But as you note above, that's separate from the ability to run 3D cockpits. You're saying you can't run 3d cockpits under 0.9.8a? Were you able to under other versions? How does the version come in, as opposed to I can't run 3d cockpits, period? Put another way, you suggested that adding the 3D cockpit wouldn't be popular with 0.9.8a users: It is, perhaps, unfortunate that I chose this message to respond to with my opinion, 3-D cockpits are not related to my (or any other users) inability to fly certain aircraft under 098a to the best of my knowledge. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. This is assuming that the FDM will be updated as well. This may be an incorrect assumption. As far as I'm aware, upgrading to a 3-d cockpit alone will not stop 098a users, who can currently run 3-d cockpits, from flying this fantastic a/c and a 3-d cockpit as shown in the screen shots can only enhance this experience. . . .and I'm wondering why the FG version matters when it comes to adding the 3D cockpit. Plenty of people used 3D cockpits with 0.9.8a. The reason I'm looking at this is because you described FG as not maintaining backward compatibility; for the most part, I don't think that's fair to FG. I agree that the JSBSim config file change is an example of failing to maintain backward compatibility; but I'd claim that it's not breaking backward compatibility in the way you describe. Using the rest of the software industry as a guide, the breaking of backward compatibility there is *not* in 0.9.8a not being able to digest new aircraft; rather, it's in 0.9.9 not being able to use old aircraft files as is. and this is the basis of my concerns for any aircraft upgradeif an aircraft is available under to fly an earlier version of FG then a version that continues it to be able to be flown under that earlier vesion should continue to be available. Ie as a separate aircraft (or build of) That's the norm: new versions of software able to read files for old versions of software; but not vice-versa, since that would make adding functionality very difficult. For example, you can't use MS Word 2003 .doc files in Word 97; but older .doc files will work in newer versions of Word OK. And I don't think it's fair to call the adding of more functionality, which in turn overtaxes older hardware, as breaking backward compatibility. After all, that'll always be a problem with sophisticated software -- try running Windows XP on a 486DX machine. My backward compatibility comments where mainly aimed at MP. Unfortunately word processor analogies doesn't really apply as there aren't too mainly truely MP applications in the commercial world (ie each user interacting with others) Possibly the closest analogy is that of a DB app. If you run a newer version of the front end than me on the same DB then I could reasonably expect to encounter problems. At best using the old version of a front end would cause data inconsistencies. BUT If I chose to stay with the old version front end then I could still expect the functionality I had enjoyed to still be available. This is not the case
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
dene maxwell wrote: From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. Typically I'm a person that seeks for harmony so I resisted to post such words for quite some time, but now the moment has come where I realize that I definitely feel pissed by such comments like the one quoted above. How do you _dare_ to imply that every aircraft without a v098 implementation is useless tu _us_ ? You can't expect people to cease develompment of new features just because one or two users still prefer to run an outdated version of the software. This is real bullshit, not only that, it would leave Flightear development falling behind until it reaches insignificance. Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
dene maxwell wrote: I would hate to see a aircraft that works under 098a and perhaps earlier that is enjoyed by many users overwritten and possibliy become unavailable. Nobody holds you back from keeping a copy of the old aircraft implementation, you just don't get all the new featuers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Lee Elliott a écrit : On Saturday 25 February 2006 17:56, alexis bory wrote: I'll do that ASAP, maybe sunday night or monday. I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. I have furbished a .tgz of A-10 with the actual 3D cockpit, it doesn't permit yet to disable the added 3D stuff, but why not ;) (Dene, please, will you try it ?) I just wonder who/where to send it ? Alexis --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
On Sunday 26 February 2006 12:09, alexis bory wrote: Lee Elliott a écrit : On Saturday 25 February 2006 17:56, alexis bory wrote: I'll do that ASAP, maybe sunday night or monday. I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. I have furbished a .tgz of A-10 with the actual 3D cockpit, it doesn't permit yet to disable the added 3D stuff, but why not ;) (Dene, please, will you try it ?) I just wonder who/where to send it ? Alexis Could you send me a copy - I'd like to have a play with it:) I think there has been some misunderstanding with regard to the differences between version 0.9.8(a) and 0.9.9 YASim aircraft. The main issue isn't one of adding new features but of fixing a significant bug and this is why some YASim aircraft have become incompatible between the two releases. The nature of the bug - that of the wing incidence being reversed - means that affected aircraft i.e. those with non-zero incidence are fundamentally incorrect under 0.9.8(a) and so maintaining compatibility with 0.9.8(a) and earlier doesn't really make much sense. As it happened, I did add a couple of new 'features' to the current version of the A-10 but they aren't 0.9.9 specific and could be added to the 0.9.8(a) version but because that version is effectively broken there's not a lot of point in spending the time to do it, especially when I've still got other aircraft to fix - I'm currently working on the Canberra - another aircraft affected by the same bug. LeeE --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Chris Metzler wrote: Sorry, I'm feeling really slow (probably because it's late where I am, and I should go to sleep). There was a change in JSBSim configuration file format in going to JSBSim 2.0; that has caused a lot of aircraft that haven't yet been updated to not run under FG 0.9.9, and still others that *have* been updated to not run under earlier versions (although one can always hang on to an old version, I guess). But as you note The reason I'm looking at this is because you described FG as not maintaining backward compatibility; for the most part, I don't think that's fair to FG. I agree that the JSBSim config file change is an example of failing to maintain backward compatibility; but I'd claim that it's not breaking backward compatibility in the way you describe. Well ... this is interesting. Somehow I missed this conversation until now. For the past year and more I have gone to great lengths to publicize the impending changes to JSBSim in this mailing list, the JSBSim mailing list, and the JSBSim newsletter. I've publicized the backward incompatibility, and the reasons for going to the new format. I've publicized that we have created a converter for going from the old format to the new. We did not fail to maintain backward compatibility so much as we did not *limit* ourselves by the past. This is not the first time there has been a major configuration file format change. Likely, it *will* be the last. Originally, eight years ago, the JSBSim configuration files were not rooted in XML, but were simply in a text format. We moved to XML somewhere about 2000. Some newer technologies (to me, anyhow) emerged, an industry standard began to emerge (that JSBSim helped to inspire), and some new and broad JSBSim capabilities were being added - all which dictated that there would need to be changes in the way the config files were arranged. This has all been communicated both here and in the JSBSim mailing list. Maintaining backward compatibility would have negated what we were hoping to accomplish - one of which was better formed XML config files and offloading JSBSim from much of the file parsing work by using the eXpat-based easyXML for our XML parser. Remember, were are not yet at v1.0. I wanted to make sure that we got it right for v1.0. There are many new capabilities that we really wanted to have. We spent a long time developing it and testing it. Some last minute adjustments presented some glitches with the config file in FlightGear, but those will soon be a thing of the past, and we'll be dealing with a more stable, more capable, JSBSim. Hang in there. Jon --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
dene maxwell wrote: If I chose to stay with the old version front end then I could still expect the functionality I had enjoyed to still be available. This is not the case with 098a MP. 098a MP no longer exists and having supported a household upgrade to cable 'net on the basis of being able to enjoy the MP experience, you might be able to understand my disappointment when I found out what had been, no longer was. FlightGear is free software. Unlike mentioned word processors or operating system, there's just no outside reason to not upgrade to a newer version. If you _chose_ to stay with the old version, you'll have to live with not getting new features. But it's entirely up to you. I see no reason why everyone else should abandon new features, just because you chose to. You don't lose anything either. You can keep old versions of the data and if you want, even check them out from the CVS tree. http://ximbiot.com/cvs/manual/ Nine --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Chris wrote: To what little I understand, I agree completely that changes were good. But from the FlightGear perspective, one could have imagined different ways of dealing with old-style config files. For example, one could have imagined a parser which detected the config file style, and acted differently on that basis -- anywhere from screaming about the old file's format and warning that it'll probably stop working with the next version, to encouraging the user to look into getting an updated config, to pointing the user to the conversion software so they can try it themselves, to having the user stand by while config file style conversion was attempted right then in an automated fashion -- all things I've seen other applications do when faced with this situation. We just broke the old files, and while that should nudge developers who hadn't yet reacted to the warnings about the config file changes, it also was probably rough on a few users, who found that planes they enjoyed suddenly didn't work anymore. Good suggestions. There are places I've tried to catch obvious problems, but it doesn't always work. One of those places is the configuration file version number. What is supposed to happen is that when an old configuration file is read, the new code is supposed to inform the user what is wrong. Sometimes it doesn't work as well as it could. Anyhow, I'll keep this in mind and maybe I can add some of these suggestions. But, I have noticed that sometimes when error messages are sent to the console, the user doesn't look for those, anyhow. SimGear also hides the messages that JSBSim normally puts out to prevent the user from being inundated with messages. At a time like this, users may want to turn on some of those messages, or some of them should bypass the SimGear message handling mechanism. (?) Jon --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Jon S. Berndt wrote: Anyhow, I'll keep this in mind and maybe I can add some of these suggestions. But, I have noticed that sometimes when error messages are sent to the console, the user doesn't look for those, anyhow. SimGear also hides the messages that JSBSim normally puts out to prevent the user from being inundated with messages. At a time like this, users may want to turn on some of those messages, or some of them should bypass the SimGear message handling mechanism. (?) FlightGear should always display messages when it is labeled alert. Maybe there is a log-level mismatch between FlightGear and JSBSim? Erik -- http://www.ehtw.info (Dutch)Future of Enschede Airport Twente http://www.ehofman.com/fgfs FlightGear Flight Simulator http://www.cafepress.com/fgfs_flightsim FlightGear Art --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
RE: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Erik wrote:
FlightGear should always display messages when it is labeled alert.
Maybe there is a log-level mismatch between FlightGear and JSBSim?
Here's the controlling code in JSBSim.cxx:
switch (logbuf::get_log_priority()) {
case SG_BULK:
FGJSBBase::debug_lvl = 0x1f;
break;
case SG_DEBUG:
FGJSBBase::debug_lvl = 0x0f;
case SG_INFO:
FGJSBBase::debug_lvl = 0x01;
break;
case SG_WARN:
case SG_ALERT:
FGJSBBase::debug_lvl = 0x00;
break;
}
If the JSBSim variable, debug_lvl, is set to zero, nothing comes out of
JSBSim. That turns off JSBSim output. Setting debug_lvl to 1 echoes the
inputs that JSBSim gets. Anything above that adds more stuff - probably more
than FlightGear needs. An overhaul is probably in order on the JSBSim side,
but at the moment at least the WARN|ALERT level of SimGear should set
debug_lvl to 0x01.
Jon
---
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
On Sunday 26 February 2006 06:13, dene maxwell wrote: Hi Chris, I don't disagree with anything you're saying. I don't (and never have) run 3-d cockpits, I believe my hardware setup is too primative to support them. This is not the fault of FG, it is a probelm I am saving up to remedy. You are right; I can't run 3-d cockpits. I run 098a binary and G099 data/0910 scenery but have tried a number of aircraft that have been developed for the 099 binary that won't work or have unpredictable behaviour when using the 098a binary. You should be able to use the CVS version (and hence 3D cockpit) provide that you don't change your FDM config file. Ampere --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Hi Alexis, How big is the file? as I have a size limit on the Hotmail account. If less than 1Mbyte please send to; [EMAIL PROTECTED] , if bigger please send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] I look forward to trying it out. Regards Dene From: alexis bory [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 13:09:47 +0100 Lee Elliott a écrit : On Saturday 25 February 2006 17:56, alexis bory wrote: I'll do that ASAP, maybe sunday night or monday. I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. I have furbished a .tgz of A-10 with the actual 3D cockpit, it doesn't permit yet to disable the added 3D stuff, but why not ;) (Dene, please, will you try it ?) I just wonder who/where to send it ? Alexis --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ Looking for love? Check out XtraMSN Personals http://xtramsn.match.com/match/mt.cfm?pg=channeltcid=200731 --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Martin, I regret any offence I may have caused you. Given that this not the first time I have caused you personal offence. After careful consideration I feel it is prudent that I hang up the keyboard on the developer lists, at least until such time as I can afford hardware that will allow me to provide valid comments in the context of new developments. Regards Dene From: Martin Spott [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To: flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2006 11:42:50 + (UTC) dene maxwell wrote: From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. Typically I'm a person that seeks for harmony so I resisted to post such words for quite some time, but now the moment has come where I realize that I definitely feel pissed by such comments like the one quoted above. How do you _dare_ to imply that every aircraft without a v098 implementation is useless tu _us_ ? You can't expect people to cease develompment of new features just because one or two users still prefer to run an outdated version of the software. This is real bullshit, not only that, it would leave Flightear development falling behind until it reaches insignificance. Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel _ Need more speed? Get Xtra Broadband @ http://jetstream.xtra.co.nz/chm/0,,202853-1000,00.html --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
On Saturday 25 February 2006 17:56, alexis bory wrote: Lee Elliott a écrit : On Friday 24 February 2006 21:11, alexis bory wrote: 10 more days and I will put a .tgz too :) How are those folk who like flying the A-10 getting on with the current version in cvs? OK, Martin said quite the same thing :) I'm currently figuring out the best way to prepare a separate folder like 'A-10-3Dcockpit' and tidy the mess I made everywhere. I'd like to upload some thing clean ( shall I upload to ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/incoming/ ? ) I'll do that ASAP, maybe sunday night or monday. Alexis I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) LeeE --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
alexis bory wrote: I'd like to upload some thing clean ( shall I upload to ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/incoming/ ? ) Sorry, no, this upload directory is for scenery models only as I don't write to the CVS tree (except from changes to The Manual), Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Hi Lee, From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Saturday 25 February 2006 17:56, alexis bory wrote: Lee Elliott a écrit : On Friday 24 February 2006 21:11, alexis bory wrote: 10 more days and I will put a .tgz too :) How are those folk who like flying the A-10 getting on with the current version in cvs? OK, Martin said quite the same thing :) I'm currently figuring out the best way to prepare a separate folder like 'A-10-3Dcockpit' and tidy the mess I made everywhere. I'd like to upload some thing clean ( shall I upload to ftp://ftp.ihg.uni-duisburg.de/FlightGear/incoming/ ? ) I'll do that ASAP, maybe sunday night or monday. Alexis I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. As a general comment; FGFS is not by philosophy, backwardly compatible...eg 098a MP some aircraft. I takes some getting used to, as most of the sofware I use, maintains backward compatibilty. LeeE =Dene _ Discover fun and games at @ http://xtramsn.co.nz/kids --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:16:51 +1300 dene maxwell wrote: From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. As a general comment; FGFS is not by philosophy, backwardly compatible...eg 098a MP some aircraft. I takes some getting used to, as most of the sofware I use, maintains backward compatibilty. What do you mean by an 098a implementation, and what does backward compatability mean in this context? What features are implemented in Alexis' A-10 cockpit that 0.9.8a does not support? -c -- Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] (remove snip-me. to email) As a child I understood how to give; I have forgotten this grace since I have become civilized. - Chief Luther Standing Bear signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
On Saturday 25 February 2006 19:25, Lee Elliott wrote: I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) LeeE Separating models would make them easier to maintain. You can always merge them at runtime by adding appropriate lines in the animation files. Ampere --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid0944bid$1720dat1642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
Hi Chris, agreed, 3-D is not a 099 peculiarity... but I can't run 3-D cockpits under my implementation of 098a, I've put this down to hardware restrictions and it hasn't been important as there are plenty of options in the way of equally enjoyable aircraft. Some of the new aircraft are designed to run under FGFS 099 and have to have special makes to run under 098a. Again I reiterate this not because they have 3-d cockpits but for other reasons related to the changes from 098a to 099 (JBSim 2.0 and the changes to the FDM for example) I would hate to see a aircraft that works under 098a and perhaps earlier that is enjoyed by many users overwritten and possibliy become unavailable. From: Chris Metzler [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sun, 26 Feb 2006 17:16:51 +1300 dene maxwell wrote: From: Lee Elliott [EMAIL PROTECTED] I can't see any need for a separate folder - add your stuff to the A-10, your name and comments to the existing files, especially the author tag in the A-10-set.xml file and send it to one of the cvs maintainers. A separate A-10-3Dcockpit would make the existing A-10 redundant - who would want to fly it without your cockpit? :) Maybe those langishing on 098a? From what I've seen of Alexis cockpit, I would love to fly it with his cockpit, as I enjoy the A10 FDM. But any new a/c, unless they have a 098a implementation, are useless to us. As a general comment; FGFS is not by philosophy, backwardly compatible...eg 098a MP some aircraft. I takes some getting used to, as most of the sofware I use, maintains backward compatibilty. What do you mean by an 098a implementation, and what does backward compatability mean in this context? What features are implemented in Alexis' A-10 cockpit that 0.9.8a does not support? -c My general comment about backward compatibilty, given the above, should need no further explaination. My second reference to 098a was more generally aimed at MP, which I have been informed that if I use this feature under 098a, I will cause frustration to my self and impair the performance of other MP users. Neither of which I wish to do. Kind Regards =Dene _ Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/ --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] A-10 3D cockpit progress
alexis bory wrote: 10 more days and I will put a .tgz too :) I'dd suggest you to already submit those parts that you consider to be in a useful state - even if the whole cockpit is still not complete, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- --- This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory! http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnkkid=110944bid=241720dat=121642 ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
