> Ok, I have pushed the current JSBSim/CVS version to FlightGear git.
>
> Please check for and report breakages. In case of aircraft breakages
> compare aircraft behaviour before and after the JSBSim update, if
> possible, to determine if the breakage is new or not.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Anders
That'
Ditto here with my WIP
Thanks
Alan
From: Gijs de Rooy
Sent: Tuesday, June 11, 2013 10:08 PM
To: FlightGear Development list
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim Synch with FlightGear
Hi Anders,
> Ok, I have pushed the current JSBSim/CVS version to FlightGear git.
a very quick test fli
Hi Anders,
> Ok, I have pushed the current JSBSim/CVS version to FlightGear git.
a very quick test flight with the 747-400 showed no different behaviour than
yesterday.
I'll do some more thorough testing later this week, but so far all looks fine.
Thanks for taking care of the update!
Gijs
Ok, I have pushed the current JSBSim/CVS version to FlightGear git.
Please check for and report breakages. In case of aircraft breakages
compare aircraft behaviour before and after the JSBSim update, if
possible, to determine if the breakage is new or not.
Cheers,
Anders
--
-
On Tue, 11 Jun 2013, Alex Romosan wrote:
> wouldn't it better to have something like this:
>
>FGPropertyManager pm =
> FGPropertyManager((FGPropertyNode*)globals->get_props() );
>fdmex = new FGFDMExec(&pm);
>
> that way we don't leak an FGPropertyManager object on each reset. seems
> to w
Anders Gidenstam writes:
>
> 2.
> The JSBSim class FGPropertyManager was previously derived from
> SGPropertyNode, but isn't now. This affects the creation of the
> main JSBSim object (FGFDMExec) since it requires a FGPropertyManager
> instance to access the property tree.
>
> I have currently
On Mon, 10 Jun 2013, Erik Hofman wrote:
> On 06/10/2013 10:12 AM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
>>
>>> Can I request that the current version of JSBSim that is in our cvs as of
>>> this moment be synched to FlightGear as early as convenient for the
>>> synch-e
On 06/10/2013 10:12 AM, Anders Gidenstam wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
>
>> Can I request that the current version of JSBSim that is in our cvs as of
>> this moment be synched to FlightGear as early as convenient for the
>> synch-er? What's the proper procedure?
>
> Usually Erik
On Sun, 9 Jun 2013, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> Can I request that the current version of JSBSim that is in our cvs as of
> this moment be synched to FlightGear as early as convenient for the
> synch-er? What's the proper procedure?
Usually Erik does the synchronization. However, if he doesn't have ti
tGear developers discussions
Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] JSBSim Synch with FlightGear
On 14 Jan 2013, at 02:57, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
When's the next released scheduled after the upcoming one?
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Release_plan
So, 7 months from now.
Whil
Am 14.01.2013 03:57, schrieb Jon S. Berndt:
> Outerra will be more up to date than FlightGear with respect to JSBSim.
It's hard to be the best all the times ;-)
Torsten
--
Master Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL, ASP.NET,
On 14 Jan 2013, at 02:57, Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> When's the next released scheduled after the upcoming one?
http://wiki.flightgear.org/Release_plan
So, 7 months from now.
While it would be good to have a new version of JSBSim, the whole purpose of
the freeze is to give a stable targe
> > > Sorry - but as we improve our plan with every release, this most
> > > likely will not happen again ;-)
> > >
> > > Torsten
> >
> > When was the last time that JSBSim was synched with FlightGear?
> >
> > Jon
>
> We synced about six months ago just before the last release of FGFS.
Outerra wi
On Sunday 13 January 2013 16:38:29 Jon S. Berndt wrote:
> > Yes, i had hoped, too. However, as you mentioned, many new features
> > have been developed and that violates our feature freeze rule,
> > unfortunately.
> > That rule has been introduced for exactly this situation: not to raise
> > some l
> Yes, i had hoped, too. However, as you mentioned, many new features
> have been developed and that violates our feature freeze rule,
> unfortunately.
> That rule has been introduced for exactly this situation: not to raise
> some last minute issues (to avoid "bugs" here).
>
> Sorry - but as we i
> I had hoped that we could do this a couple of months ago, but not synching
> JSBSim with the latest FlightGear would be very, very unfortunate. I'm not
> sure when the last sync occurred (does anyone know?), but there have been
> a lot of new features and bug fixes. Development has been very acti
Am 13.01.2013 20:33, schrieb Stuart Buchanan:
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Torsten Dreye wrote:
>> Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
>>
>> should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
>> release, scheduled for February this year?
>
> My vote is not to sync at this point.
>
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Torsten Dreye wrote:
> > Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
> >
> > should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
> > release, scheduled for February this year?
>
> My vote is not to sync at this point.
>
> I'd consider a JSBSim sync to be simi
On 13 Jan 2013, at 19:33, Stuart Buchanan wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Torsten Dreye wrote:
>> Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
>>
>> should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
>> release, scheduled for February this year?
>
> My vote is not to sync at this
On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 11:35 AM, Torsten Dreye wrote:
> Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
>
> should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
> release, scheduled for February this year?
My vote is not to sync at this point.
I'd consider a JSBSim sync to be similar to feature dev
Hi JSBSim and FlightGear lists,
should we sync the latest JSBSim code into FlightGear for the next
release, scheduled for February this year?
If so, please do this very soon so there is some time to rule out any
oddities before I create the release branches on January, 17th.
Thanks, Torsten
21 matches
Mail list logo