> -----Original Message----- > From: Eric Brasseur [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, November 21, 2005 10:20 PM > To: 'FlightGear user discussions' > Subject: Re: [Flightgear-users] pre-release 0.9.9 on Win32 > > Kevin Jones wrote: > > >Hi all, > > > >There seems to be some debate about whether FG pre-release 0.9.9 is > >(or was) available for Windows. I'm going to proverbially "pop my > >head over the parapet" in support of the FG developers. > > > >0.9.9 *is* available for Win32 in the same way that it's available for > >other platforms...as source code (I've just checked the source code > >download page). It's not hard to build the source code on Win32. I > >used to think it was hard because all of the information to build for > >Win32 was fragmented around the message forums. To try and relieve > >that pain I spent many hours learning how to build FG source for Win32 > >then wrote a PDF document to help others. That doc has been reviewed > >and is now hosted on the FG Downloads -> Tutorials section (thanks AJ, > >Curt and others). > > > >The tools to compile FG are, like FG itself, FREE. I'd like to > >politely ask the readers of this forum that they remember FG is free > >and, for those that are using the sim rather than contributing to the > >project, take a moment to consider how many hours the developers have > >committed. This is their own time purely for the love of the hobby (I > >assume?!?). > > > >Please, please, please stop badgering the developers. Try downloading > >the document, downloading the build tools (Cygwin), downloading the > >source and having a go at verifying the source. As Curt recently > >said...the more people that verify the pre-release source the less > >chance there is of releasing problems. > > > >My final comment - if you truly believe there is a problem then try > >making a positive contribution. Reliable documentation, for example, > >is just as valuable as the code itself. > > > >My personal thanks to all of the FG developers...may you all continue > >to give up your time for this *excellent* FREE product. > > > >I hope I mentioned "FREE" enough times in that message :) > > > >Kevin. > > > Hello Kevin, > > I think that you spoke the truth but that the truth is not always what > matters. I think we shouldn't care about who has "merits" and who is > "responsible". The Open Source strategy is brilliant. To me FlightGear > just has some problems of tactics. End users are a little dumb when it > comes to compiling things, even with a neat procedure listed. Whatever > precise and reliable the procedure, they simply don't understand the > words. Even if they understand the words, they're afraid. They already > have so many problems with their system... I once installed Cygwin and > used it. It wasn't simple at all. It took me gigabytes of DSL bandwidth.
> The developers must adapt to the end users, not the opposite. It's quite possible that I'm not getting what you're saying. I read you as saying that for the most part, the FG-on-Windows user community isn't going to "get it" when it comes to making the kind of contributions to testing that developers need, and so the developers have to do whatever is necessary to make things easy for the Windows users to try the software out and report problems -- becasue if the developers don't do this, the Windows users just aren't going to provide that input/info. Do I have you correctly? Assuming that I do . . .first of all, it's important to understand that the project doesn't have a huge number of developers contributing; and of those that are, very very few of them (one or two?) are working on the Windows platform; and of those that do, they are limited in time available to contribute (like all of us). For example, I can't do anything to make it easier for Windows users because I don't own a Windows machine, I don't use Windows, and I don't have access to a Windows machine on which I could work on FG-related stuff. So what you're essentially doing is telling the very small number of Windows contributors -- people who probably got involved, and sustain their interest in the project, because of things they were excited about working on -- what they should be doing with their very limited time *instead* of working on what they find interesting and what keeps them enthusiastic about committing their limited time to the project. Can you see how that might rub some people the wrong way? And so developers tend to respond to stuff like this with the thing that first came to my mind when reading your post: "It sounds like this is important to you; so it seems to me that this would be a fabulous way for you to get started contributing to the project." I've seen this paraphrased earlier in this thread as "fix it yourself," which may make it seem like the poster is being blown-off; but I assure you that that's not the case. That is the path by which more or less *every* contributor to *every* open source project got started working on that project -- they saw something that they thought would be worth doing, and they started working on it. Jumping in and trying to make a contribution is well-respected and encouraged; telling other people to stop doing what they're doing, and do something else you find important but they may not, is bound to come across as rude. Particularly when one barely has any time to work on the project at all, one wants to work on things one has some enthusiasm for. FG has a fairly sizeable Windows user community. What it doesn't have is a sizeable Windows *developer* community. If it did, Windows-specific bugs would probably get fixed a lot faster, pre-release testing would be a lot easier for Windows users, etc. And that would be good, sure. But I myself am not going to be purchasing Windows XP and installing it on my machine, and learning how to develop on that platform. I want to work on the things that interest me. If I'm not doing that, working on FG stuff becomes a chore rather than fun. And believe me, I already have enough chores to do. In the end, the solution is for developers who care a lot about fixing a problem to fix the problem. That can happen either through the small number of existing Windows developers -- in which case it may take a while, because there's a small number of them and their time is tight like everyone else's. Or, it can happen because some Windows users who like FlightGear decide they care enough to do what other contributors all did -- roll up their sleeves and try to help get it fixed. So again: you're saying that it's important for the project to make it easier for Windows users to test the software? Making that happen sounds like a good way you could help out. -c _______________________________________________ Flightgear-users mailing list [email protected] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-users 2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
