[Flightgear-devel] LinuxWorld application deadline today Friday April 11
If anyone wants to apply for the San Francisco 2008 .org pavilion, now would be a really good time to do so (if they haven't already). - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] [Flightgear-cvslogs] CVS: data/AI/Aircraft/Citation/Models Citation-II.ac, 1.2, 1.3 Citation-II.png, 1.1, NONE Citation-II.rgb, 1.2, 1.3
Gentlemen, Please note that since a couple of months we have a separate branch of the base package for CVS/PLIB (Simply tagged plib). Anything specific to the plib branch should go into that branch. In other words, data/HEAD should be used specifically for CVS/OSG development. In other words, using png in CVS/HEAD is perfectly fine, because the CVS/HEAD branch will never be released in the eventuality of another PLIB based maintenance release. See Melchior's post from early January (or thereabouts) for more detail. Cheers, Durk On Friday 11 April 2008 02:55, Syd Adams wrote: > Update of /var/cvs/FlightGear-0.9/data/AI/Aircraft/Citation/Models > In directory baron:/tmp/cvs-serv17419/Citation/Models > > Modified Files: > Citation-II.ac > Added Files: > Citation-II.rgb > Removed Files: > Citation-II.png > Log Message: > Removed png textures , at least until an OSG release, or it's decided that > these be removed altogether > - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AirRacing over MP
Hi, I forgot to say two things. - The AirRacing should work on both 1.0.0 and CVS/OSG.- It will be a time-trial on either without network connection or with single attendee on MP. Cheers, Tat On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Tatsuhiro Nishioka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > I've started an FlightGear AirRacing over MP, a simple gate passing race > with multiple users. > The archive is available from: > > http://macflightgear.sourceforge.net/wp-content/uploads/airracing/AirRacing-20080407.tar.gz > > There is no fancy web site for the AirRacing yet, so please take a look at > README in the archive > for installation and how-to-play. > > This is in the very early development phase, so there is a spacious room > for improvement. > But it is playable so give it a try. I'll improve its 3D models, textures, > and race itself. > I'm also going to make a brief web page for it soon. > > Hope you enjoy it. > > I also want to say that great thanks goes to Torsten, Till, Anders, and > Andy. You guys are great!! > The code is originally based on Red Bull Air Race (very different right > now due to MP capability and difference in rules but these two races could > be united since I made AirRacing extensible). It features modified version > of Till's multiplayer dialog and original BroadcastChannel by Anders. and of > course it runs on Andy's great Nasal. :-) > > I think this AirRacing can be 'flying' tutorial in the near future since > you can easily add penalty checker classes. > When the core code goes well stable, I want to make more racing/tutorial > things like acrobatic tutorial > and something like that. > > Best, > > Tat > > - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: "EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims"
Hi! LeeE wrote: > [...], there should be nothing to prevent a photographer from taking > a photograph of the Eiffel Tower lights and exhibiting it to > others, as long as they don't do so for profit, because it's their > personal view and artistic expression of something they've seen in > the public domain. Typically copyright does not distinguish between "for profit" and "not for profit". The main distinction is what in Germany is called "geschäftsmäßig", which is something like "in a regular manner". Distributing the models in a package for general availability probably falls in this category, whether for profit or not. IANAL. Cheers, Ralf - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: "EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims"
* LeeE -- Thursday 10 April 2008: > Thanks for posting that. BTW: the discussion about the first link is also interesting: http://www.boingboing.net/2008/03/21/wwii-bomber-trademar.html m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] FYI: "EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims"
On Thursday 10 April 2008 11:33, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html > http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator > > m. Thanks for posting that. I think the EFF article has the best take on it - it was not appropriate grant the term "B-24" as a trade-mark in the first place. The article points out that "B-24" is a US Military model number but perhaps even more importantly, it should have made it clear that "B-24" is just one entry in an identification scheme devised by, and therefore 'owned' by, the US military, which means, in effect, the US government. There are actually two potential issues raised by this - trademark law and copyright law. In this case, L-M seem to have gone for trademark law, specifically over the use of "B-24" and because of this there should be no problem with releasing any of the PB4Y-1 Naval variants. Similarly, any of the B-24 models used by the RAF, and known as "Liberators" would also not be covered (I'm not sure if the name 'Liberator' was originated in the US but it was standard practice for the RAF to re-name US aircraft e.g. the B-29 SuperFortress became the 'Washington', the Douglas A-20 Havoc became the Boston etc, but in any case, the trademark is for "B-24" and not "Liberator"). Furthermore, if it is "B-24" that has been trademarked, it is questionable if this covers specific variants such as B-24A/B/C/D/E/G/H/J models as once again, these are specific entries in the US Military numbering scheme. Copyright law may yet become an issue in these types of case, because copyright deals with the actual design and is intended to stop copyrighted designs from being copied for means of profit. However, even this has become a bit of a minefield because the copyrighted design, in the case of aircraft for example, is for a real aircraft and not a model or representation of it, which does not purport to be an actual example of the real article, and which may include paintings, drawings, cartoons, photographs or 3D models. It is also unlikely that laws will be introduced to prevent people from making reproductions of things they have seen in public with their own eyes. I seem to remember that copyright was used by the people who installed the lights on the Eiffel Tower to stop other people from selling postcards showing the tower at night. In this case though, it could be argued that the whole point of the postcards was to primarily show the lighting design, which was copyrighted, and not the tower itself, which was not. Re the point about laws preventing people from making reproductions of things they have seen, there should be nothing to prevent a photographer from taking a photograph of the Eiffel Tower lights and exhibiting it to others, as long as they don't do so for profit, because it's their personal view and artistic expression of something they've seen in the public domain. We do need to keep our eyes on this though. LeeE - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] FYI: "EFF fights for the rights of 3D modellers against bogus trademark claims"
http://www.johnmacneill.com/WWII_Bomber.html http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/04/liberate-b-24-liberator m. - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
Hi all, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > I think the v1.0 release has seen a step-change in the use of FG. > > There are a large number of new (often quite young) users who are > generally inhabit the forums rather than the lists. They are tending > to use MP all the time, as it is part of their expectations of the > system (I'm guessing because they have a background in games like > World of Warcraft). Yes the average profile of our users is changing (as the hardware they use) the forums shows much more hi definition and cosmetic features requests than lower hardware use requests. It seems that for those who fly mostly on MP, the AI model should have a good definition and a complete set of external animations. Also the AI aircrafts should have a good external texturing (like our standard 512*512 to 1024*1024 texture). Note that users begin to propose huge textures and that reflects a need. About modeling a new model for AI aircrafts: I agree with AJ and I would prefer not to. I would better think about a new XML file to be read at first on MP loading so FG just load a simplified model without the cockpit and all the avionic nasal, also it disable unnecessary external animations. > Given this, making all the aircraft easily and cheaply available of > MP seems a no-brainer to me. IMO the argument is really about how > large these aircraft should be, and whether they should be part of > the release base-package or not. About where to put AI aircrafts. Yes there is no point in putting too many thing in the base package. who wants to D/L the whole army stuff while setting up a C172 simulator for the local Aero Club ? And for those who like to play RedFlag, its more a fun to fetch here and there "addons" to complete their "game" (thats quite a marketing "plus"). About scenery: I committed recently 2 *very* low poly aircraft in data/Models/Aircraft. The Aircraft models here are intented to be there for static display on scenery airports, they are 250 to 600 KB sized and don't have any animation. A realistic airport could have tenth of them dispatched every where, That is compatible with AI Traffic which use nicer and animated models. That's all, Alexis - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Vivian Meazza wrote: > 1. A long time ago in the early days of MP the policy was > agreed: "If you > don't have it you don't see it". No glider, no > ufo, nothing. And AFAIK > that's still the case. IF we want to depart from this > long standing policy, > then that's a slightly different debate. I think the v1.0 release has seen a step-change in the use of FG. There are a large number of new (often quite young) users who are generally inhabit the forums rather than the lists. They are tending to use MP all the time, as it is part of their expectations of the system (I'm guessing because they have a background in games like World of Warcraft). Given this, making all the aircraft easily and cheaply available of MP seems a no-brainer to me. IMO the argument is really about how large these aircraft should be, and whether they should be part of the release base-package or not. > 4. We don't seriously think that OSG is fit for a > release this side of > Christmas do we? Should we really be using .png in anything > other than osg > only models such as the Buccaneer, and even then I think I > removed all .png > textures from the AI/MP version. (And now I'm going to > have to :-)) Yes, I think OSG is going to be fit for release, and quite soon. In fact, setting a target for an OSG release sometime this summer might be a good way to encourage the bugs and rough edges to be smoothed out. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Thursday 10 April 2008 09:36:36 Stuart Buchanan wrote: > Mea culpa. I screwed up and should have posted before committing. My > apologies to all. This idea was a lot more contentious than I expected at > the time... Hey, we needed something to argue about to resuscitate the list ;-) Cheers, AJ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Wednesday 09 April 2008, Stuart Buchanan wrote: > --- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > > Do we really want MP support for all aircraft in the base > > package, at a cost of an extra 200 MB of data? Wrappers are fine > > (like Vivian described), but do we want a complete concorde.ac with all > > textures *again* in the AI/ dir? If someone wants the Concorde > > displayed, then s/he can install it, no? Currently Aircraft/ is ~1200 MB on cvs. So yes. I think we can easily afford 100 or 200 MB for "cheap" ai models. As you name the Concorde. The whole dir currently takes 19 MB. If someone adds a Concorde that takes up to 2 MB, that would be fine. > Yes, I strongly think that there would be a real benefit for everyone who > uses the base package to be able to see all MP aircraft. As well as making > the MP experience faster (which everyone would benefit from), I think it > would make it richer for new users. There is another problem that i see here. There will be a day, when we will need to decide, which aircraft will go into the base package. For someone who just wants to try FlightGear the base package shouldn't be too large. We might want to have about twenty well-designed and fully-functional aircraft in the base package at the end. I'd opt for inclusion of as many AI (lightweight) aircraft as possible. People who try FG, will see other models that they like, and will eventually download them. > Even though I have a fairly fast machine, MP flying around KSFO is still > marginal. It is likely to get worse as the number and complexity of > aircraft increase. Creating AI models (and also promoting a culture of > creating AI models for all new aircraft) would go a long to helping this. Yes. I'm all for promoting a culture of creating AI models for all aircraft. > In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the base package seems > reasonable. I agree. > I think it should be possible to create AI aircraft at less than, say, > 500KB per aircraft, which would grow the base package by less than 100MB. > For example, the Vulcan AI model is around 200KB. If they can be that cheap it is perfect. IMHO we can't be too restrictive here, though. Some aircraft will need a little more space. > > I'd prefer fgfs to show better information about which > > aircraft couldn't be shown because they aren't installed, > > and a better LOD concept (LOD in the aircraft dir, where it belongs). I very much like this idea, Melchior. We would need to come up with a solution that would allow us to easily deliver many low-LOD models (for multiplayer-support) with the base package. And then, there has to be an easy way to upgrade to the full aircraft. Could you propose a more detailed design that would allow all of that? I would volunteer to write the necessary code. > How about the following > > - Maximum size 250KB. > - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size in both dimensions. > > Does that seem reasonable? This seems like a hard limit. I really don't want to see plenty of aircraft with crappy textures. Lightweight aircraft should still look pretty from the outside -- even when standing right next to them. Reducing the texture size is fine, but please check that it will still look nice. cheers, - till - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
On Thursday 10 April 2008 09:19:04 Stuart Buchanan wrote: > Without wanting to put words into his mouth, I assume that is Melchior's > (and others) main concern, rather than the size of our CVS repository > itself. My main concern would rather be the infliction of low poly, blurry textured, largely unanimated models on the MP world all for a possible slight improvement in performance for those with older hardware (slight over the alternative "skeleton aircraft" method already used by most of our MP/AI aircraft and mentioned by Vivian). My secondary concern would be duplication of models, where that isn't really necessary (the Lightning, for example, has a fairly simple external model with relatively few textures; why duplicate that when it's easy to just load that and not the many large cockpit related textures and polys?) It's also normally easier for a modeller to just modify the model.xml to not load stuff than to create a "new" 3d model and textures. I do share your concerns about a separate AI models package for download (in terms of maintenance / documentation / user assistance workload); I personally think the current system is very fair - if you want to see the models, download them! Cheers, AJ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > * Stuart Buchanan -- Wednesday 09 April 2008: > > --- On Wed, 9/4/08, Melchior FRANZ wrote: > > > So, please let's discuss that first, before > anyone > > > dumps more of that stuff into $FG_ROOT/AI/! > > > > Hence my original post - discussion is good. > > Yes, discussion is good. But the original post was already > a bit > past the point where an RFC would have been in order. You > had > already started with copying textures and asked others to > do the > same. Time to take a break. Mea culpa. I screwed up and should have posted before committing. My apologies to all. This idea was a lot more contentious than I expected at the time... > > In that context, another 50 - 100MB of data in the > base package seems reasonable. > > Sound like a rather low estimation to me. Especially > considering > that helijah adds 5 aircraft every week. :-) Well, I'm not sure I can keep up with that rate ;) > > How about the following > > > > - Maximum size 250KB. > > - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size > in both dimensions. > > > > Does that seem reasonable? > > Maybe. I'd like others to comment on that. I never > claimed that it's > on me to decide. But I'd like to have such things > discussed beforeI don't think that's likely in the near term. Also > they are done. You probably know that committing a file > means that > it will be in CVS *forever*, even if you "cvs rm" > it right after that. No I didn't know that, but thinking about it for 5 minutes should have made me realize that it was probably the case. > Whatever we come up with,I don't think that's likely in the near term. Also > it would be nice if the LOD > handling could > always load the full aircraft version if you are very > close. Seeing > a blurry box parked next to you isn't pretty either. I guess that's a possibility, but I'd prefer not to have a huge new model load just as I start flying formation with another aircraft... ;) -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
-- On Wed, 9/4/08, AJ MacLeod wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2008 16:20:05 Stuart Buchanan wrote: > > How about the following > > > > - Maximum size 250KB. > > - All textures converted to PNG and scaled to 1/4 size > in both dimensions. > > > > Does that seem reasonable? > > I think we have two slightly differing concepts of what the > MP/AI aircraft are > all about. In my view, they are a nice way of providing > (at minimal effort > to modellers) versions of each aircraft which are visually > complete from > external views while being very significantly quicker to > load than their full > counterparts (the vast majority of textures, animations and > polys are > generally found in the cockpits of most of our more > complete models.) Well, this was my original idea behind creating them by chopping out the bits that weren't required. My assumption was that the cost of making these available to all users was sufficiently low to make it a no-brainer. That assumption appears to be false. > I don't, however, see any harm in someone providing an > optional "MP aircraft > pack" download that provides what Stuart would like to > achieve, for those who > want it... That would suggest simply providing AI/Aircraft as a separate download. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] AI Aircraft Models
--- On Wed, 9/4/08, Durk Talsma wrote: > I do forsee that adding loads of AI aircraft could add to > the size of the > release version of the base package. That being the case, > we could consider > spawning off a separately downloadable, optional AI > aircraft package > (including not only aircraft, but also traffic files, etc > etc). Without wanting to put words into his mouth, I assume that is Melchior's (and others) main concern, rather than the size of our CVS repository itself. Frankly, if we are worried about the size of the repository, we need to create a repository for new aircraft. But that is a different discussion... A separate AI download is a nice idea, but I think it has some issues itself: - It would increase the user workload, and realistically the support workload on here and the forums. I've found that user's rarely read our manual, wiki or FAQ before posting questions. - We (well, probably you Durk!) would have an extra package to manage during the release cycle. - We'd have to document installing it, which is quite a bit harder than you'd expect when dealing with MacOS and people who exclusively use the wizard. -Stuart ___ Yahoo! For Good helps you make a difference http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/ - This SF.net email is sponsored by the 2008 JavaOne(SM) Conference Don't miss this year's exciting event. There's still time to save $100. Use priority code J8TL2D2. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;198757673;13503038;p?http://java.sun.com/javaone ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
