Another item I meant to mention is the addition of ic4592 to the nebula file.
As is, it is simply ghastly. Far too bright. This is a very low light area and
extends for over 4 degrees and the abrupt limits of the 3 degree (nominal)
display is very noticeable. I made it look much better by processing it in
photoshop. However areas over 1 degree do not fit well over the stars because
of the spherical display. I found that large nebulae need to be split into
mosaics as I have done with the large magellenic cloud and other areas.
Barry
> Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2013 22:42:30 +0200
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Stellarium-pubdevel] The defaultStarsConfig.json problem (fixed)
> and its roots
>
> Hello to all.
>
> I choose not to derail further the other thread to reply to this:
>
> On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Barry Gerdes <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Alex
> >
> > I changed the starconfig.json OK but now the other versions I run do not
> > work.
> > You should have given the new file a slightly different name so it can
> > co-exist in the folder with the old version.
>
> This no longer will be a problem - I've bumped the version number of
> the defaultStarsConfig.json file:
> http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~stellarium/stellarium/trunk/revision/5875
>
> This means that each version of Stellarium will try to read the file
> in the user data directory, find out that its version is off, and
> replace it with that version's own default copy.
>
> This is something that *should* have been noticed and done by Alex
> when he changed the file. It's a bug that would have affected a lot of
> people after the next official release, as the old
> defaultStarsConfig.json would have remained in their user data
> directory, pointing to the old file names - in other words, to files
> not in the installation. And, no, telling users to "reset their
> settings" when they show up to complain is not an acceptable solution.
>
> Stellarium has been using user data directory copies of various files
> for quite some time. By now, touching one of them should cause
> immediately red lights to flash in one's head - "hey, what's going to
> happen to the user copy of that file when the next release rolls
> out?".
>
> What disturbs me is that this is another problem caused by
> Stellarium's lack of good developer culture - in this case, lack of
> attention and/or knowledge of the codebase and insufficient testing.
> At the moment, I can't offer a solution. The only thing that comes
> immediately to my mind is "shouting at people", but that won't be very
> productive. :(
>
> Bogdan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
> Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
> endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
> tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
> _______________________________________________
> Stellarium-pubdevel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/stellarium-pubdevel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Symantec Endpoint Protection 12 positioned as A LEADER in The Forrester
Wave(TM): Endpoint Security, Q1 2013 and "remains a good choice" in the
endpoint security space. For insight on selecting the right partner to
tackle endpoint security challenges, access the full report.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/symantec-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Stellarium-pubdevel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/stellarium-pubdevel
