Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Renk Thorsten
> -> Assumes that we want to set the limits by equipment (radar) rather > than visuals, although we've just said we don't want to do this because > of memory issues, and I've listed several points besides radar why I'd > like to do it. On re-reading, this sounds pretty hilarious... What I m

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Renk Thorsten
> Straw man ?!?!? > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man [See :: structure point 2.5] and > you will understand that simplifying my point of view trying to > invalidate it is ... a straw man technique. > Are you so sure that it is not what you have done concluding rushy that > I do not had read t

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Renk Thorsten
> ..a point I forgot to make: you (or your MUA?) don't attribute > properly what I wrote below, which may be part of the thread > breaking problem. Arnt, you do know that 'you' in the English language doesn't necessarily refer to you personally, but that it doubles as an unspecified 'one'? If I

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues

2013-02-22 Thread Renk Thorsten
> Have you ever read the getstart.pdf? apparently not. I've read it once, a long while ago. But I don't feel bound by what it says, in my view the logic is that we implement what's reasonable, then change the documentation accordingly, not that we first have a documentation as god-given and onl

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Website update request

2013-02-22 Thread Gijs de Rooy
Hi Curt, > Does FlightGear officially support Windows 8? You can find a few reports of people succesfully running FlightGear 2.10 on Windows 8. Also a few unsuccessful attempts, but that might just as well be related to hardware or configuration issues. The fact that we get plenty of issue re

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Website update request

2013-02-22 Thread Curtis Olson
Hi Toshi, Thanks for your detailed look through the main flightgear web site pages. A second set of eyes definitely helps catch things I miss. I believe I've addressed as many of these that I can. I forwarded #2 over to Gijs since he built the new 'filterable' aircraft download page. For 7-1,

Re: [Flightgear-devel] FreeBSD binary packages updated to version 2.10.0

2013-02-22 Thread Curtis Olson
Hi Keven, Thanks for the update. I'll tweak the flightgear page. Let me know if you can think of any other improvements to the FreeBSD section of the page. Thanks, Curt. On Fri, Feb 22, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Kevin Zheng wrote: > Greetings, > > Just to let the website maintainers know, the Free

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Lorenzo Calabrese
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 02/22/2013 07:10 AM, Renk Thorsten wrote: > >> ..a pointer to your previous message would help here, this thread >> is broken (in at least my MUA) and getting hard to follow. > > Maybe we just have some cultural misunderstandings? > > The way I s

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Arnt Karlsen
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 17:26:34 +0100, Arnt wrote in message <20130222172634.0b083...@celsius.lan>: > On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:10:30 +, Renk wrote in message > : > ..a point I forgot to make: you (or your MUA?) don't attribute properly what I wrote below, which may be part of the thread break

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Discussion culture clashes

2013-02-22 Thread Arnt Karlsen
On Fri, 22 Feb 2013 07:10:30 +, Renk wrote in message : > > > ..a pointer to your previous message would help here, this thread > > is broken (in at least my MUA) and getting hard to follow. > > Maybe we just have some cultural misunderstandings? ..no, in this case we _also_ have a broken

[Flightgear-devel] FreeBSD binary packages updated to version 2.10.0

2013-02-22 Thread Kevin Zheng
Greetings, Just to let the website maintainers know, the FreeBSD Project has updated the FlightGear related ports to version 2.10.0. The Project has been really good with keeping up with upstream releases in the past, so I don't think it's important to mention the version number on the web page.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues

2013-02-22 Thread Emilian Huminiuc
On Thursday, February 21, 2013 12:33:17 Renk Thorsten wrote: > > I was talking about the 16km value (sorry for not being more clear about > > that) and see below for the huge value. > > Let me get this straight. You state that the 16 km are a pretty sane value. > The proposal being discussed is t

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues

2013-02-22 Thread Saikrishna Arcot
Just to chime in, wouldn't rendering the base tile be "easier" for the GPU, and then static objects, and then dynamic objects? Saikrishna Arcot On Fri 22 Feb 2013 03:06:37 AM CST, James Turner wrote: > > On 22 Feb 2013, at 07:06, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > >> Well, that's on the way. >> Please d

Re: [Flightgear-devel] Low visibility issues

2013-02-22 Thread James Turner
On 22 Feb 2013, at 07:06, Mathias Fröhlich wrote: > Well, that's on the way. > Please do not steer any lod ranges except may be the lod bias by any property. > That's again cross connecting code areas that do not need to be connected and > that then suffer from updates into the scene graph that