> I agree that we should merge the project rembrandt work sooner rather
> than
> later. However, we should also take some time and effort to make sure
> Thorsten's sky/haze/horizon effects are accounted for as well. I don't
> know what issues we will find when trying to merge these two efforts, b
On Sun, 2012-03-04 at 07:13 -0700, Ron Jensen wrote:
> I think Curt was trying to point out a way you could make something work from
> nasal without getting into core code.
I see I may have misled by mentioning a "core" view. This might have
been taken to mean "changing the C++ core" although I
I am not sure I understand what you are trying - but:
-we use something like that in ATCing
-- keeping Target in view
-- zooming
-- relocating tower etc.
-- saving and retrieving settings
You may try my test ATC-ML model. Download from
http://emmerich-j.de/FGFS/ATC-ML.zip
see inside the descriptio
> De: Torsten Dreyer
>
> Hi Fred,
>
> today, I tried Rembrandt on two Linux machines, both running 64bit
> openSUSE 12.1 (this is Linux) with nvidia'd driver 295.20.
> FlightGear ist started in windows mode.
>
> 1.) My Notebook having a Intel dual core@1.6GHz, 4GB RAM and a
> GeForce Go 7400 wit
Hi,
in preparation to the introduction of Rembrandt in the main branch, we should
ensure that effect will be compatible with the current renderer. For that, I
added a new property to preferences.xml and modified Effects/model-default.eff
to test this new property. It will be also available to a
Hi Fred,
today, I tried Rembrandt on two Linux machines, both running 64bit
openSUSE 12.1 (this is Linux) with nvidia'd driver 295.20.
FlightGear ist started in windows mode.
1.) My Notebook having a Intel dual core@1.6GHz, 4GB RAM and a GeForce
Go 7400 with 256MB RAM.
FlightGear starts, after
> > But whenever talking about git rebase one should mention that THOU
> > SHALT NOT rebase a branch which you've ever pushed. Because if
> > someone ever pulled your
>
> What I always do, before pushing an update for the "next" branch is:
As stated previously, a code that is not run is unlikely
Am 04.03.2012 19:00, schrieb Stefan Seifert:
> But whenever talking about git rebase one should mention that THOU SHALT NOT
> rebase a branch which you've ever pushed. Because if someone ever pulled your
What I always do, before pushing an update for the "next" branch is:
git checkout next
git pu
On Sunday 04 March 2012 17:30:41 Christian Schmitt wrote:
> Curtis Olson wrote:
> > I have a local branch I've created here for some experimentation. When
> > ever I do a git pull from the gitorious repository, I do that in the
> > "next/master" branches. Then I switch to my local branch and type
Curtis Olson wrote:
> I have a local branch I've created here for some experimentation. When
> ever I do a git pull from the gitorious repository, I do that in the
> "next/master" branches. Then I switch to my local branch and type "git
> merge next (or master)" to make my local branch up to dat
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:59 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> ... (Curt wrote) and keep that merged with the "next" branch.
(Fred wrote) I don't understand what you mean. Do you want me to commit the
> work to a new "Rembrandt" branch and then merge it to the "next" branch ?
Hi Fred,
As I mentione
Hi Curt,
> De: Curtis Olson
> On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> > > As a migration path, I verified that my changes to simgear are
> > > compatible with the current next branch. If there is no
> > > objection,
> > > I will commit these changes to gitorious and begin to pr
On Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Frederic Bouvier wrote:
> > As a migration path, I verified that my changes to simgear are
> > compatible with the current next branch. If there is no objection,
> > I will commit these changes to gitorious and begin to prepare
> > the flightgear code in a way that
> As a migration path, I verified that my changes to simgear are
> compatible with the current next branch. If there is no objection,
> I will commit these changes to gitorious and begin to prepare
> the flightgear code in a way that would allow to keep the current
> renderer.
As I received no obj
On Saturday 03 March 2012 21:14:45 Ian Dall wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-03-02 at 12:39 -0600, Curtis Olson wrote:
> > Hi Ian,
> >
> > If you wish to set your own tower position, it's pretty straight
> > forward and can be done manually or via nasal or probably a few other
> > mechanisms.
> >
> >
> > By d
Am 04.03.2012 00:09, schrieb jean pellotier:
> BTW, whitch OSG version do i have to use?
>
> last devel version is ok?
Any version that reproduces the issue for you. If it still occurs with
OSG trunk, then that's also interesting. If it wasn't, well, then you
have a solution ;-).
But I already h
On Sat, 2012-03-03 at 22:52 +, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 1:36 PM, Erik Hofman wrote:
> > Personally I would think adding Project Rembrandt will call for
> > FlightGear version 3.0. So if it is added I would create two branches,
> > version 3.0 and version 2.7 in which the
17 matches
Mail list logo
