Board index FlightGear Support Flying

FG best developed airliner

Controlling your aircraft, using the autopilot etc.

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Wecsje » Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:19 pm

@camileck

It is a long story...

In case of the IDG team its easier to use github, but the plane will be on FGaddon after the v1.0 release. At the moment we still update it a lot, as it is WIP.

Regards,

Charlie (Wecsje)
Twitch Streams: https://www.twitch.tv/wecsjelive
Contact methods: Discord (Wecsje#6351), FlightSims United discord (https://discord.me/flightsimsunited), Steam (Wecsje)
Track me on VATSIM: https://vatstats.net/pilots/1397313
User avatar
Wecsje
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:13 am
Location: The Closet, Under the Stairs, the Netherlands
Callsign: WS208J
Version: Newest
OS: Windows 10 Pro

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Octal450 » Thu Aug 24, 2017 8:17 pm

Hi @camileck
To elaborate on what Wecsje says:

We prefer to use GitHub as it integrates seamlessly with several of our tools we use, like Slack etc
I also find GitHub much easily to work with on web browser vs sourceforge. (where FGAddon is)

And we (IDG) have no commit access to FGAddon.

But,
Wecsje wrote:the plane will be on FGaddon after the v1.0 release.
:)

About the 707, I find the A320Family is a bit more complex, as we model a full flight control system, the 707 don't Same with engine systems, fully modeled on A320Family, not on 707. Not to mention, completely custom automation systems for EVERY major system, and a completely custom autopilot. But I'm probably a little bias also :D

Kind Regards,
Josh
Octal450

Lead Programmer, IDG (Join our Discord!)
Download High Quality Aircraft from Octal450 Hangar
User avatar
Octal450
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Thorsten » Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:00 am

And we (IDG) have no commit access to FGAddon.


Might also be because you never asked... (at least I can't recall reading any such message on the mailing list).

We prefer to use GitHub as it integrates seamlessly with several of our tools we use, like Slack etc


Adding to that, there's good arguments for developing on an external repository and pushing regular snapshots to FGAddon.

One of them is tools (GIT vs. SVN), another is binary history - if you edit texture files and push updates, you're quickly creating a huge repository - which maybe not everyone wants to have.

Another one is user feedback - people assume that what is on FGAddon is ready, but stuff under development has frequent breakages - which the developers already know of course.

Why in FGAddon hangar some of the offered aircrafts are just "poorer" version of aircrafts that can be downloaded from 3rd party repositories?


Largely because it's easy to clone and add, but it's hard to merge back.

I can always have a 'better' version of the aircraft than you - for instance I could clone the A-320 repository, set it up to automatically update and then add a few custom graphics effects - and voila, if you'd download my repository, you'd always get just a bit more than if you download the A-320 team repository - at hardly any effort for me.

Whereas otherwise I'd have to join the A-320 team, but they might have rules and modeling guidelines which I don't like, I might not be able to do what I want but have to follow team decisions,... and I'd have to make a merge request for my custom graphics effects at which point I might be told to alter them somewhat...

So you see, the path of simple cloning and adding is more glory and less work for me.

Which, in a nutshell, this is what many prefer.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10693
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Octal450 » Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:22 am

Thorsten wrote:Might also be because you never asked... (at least I can't recall reading any such message on the mailing list).

I do believe I am not welcome on the mailing list. If this is no longer the case, then that is new news to me.

Thorsten wrote:Adding to that, there's good arguments for developing on an external repository and pushing regular snapshots to FGAddon.

I agree.

Thorsten wrote:One of them is tools (GIT vs. SVN), another is binary history - if you edit texture files and push updates, you're quickly creating a huge repository - which maybe not everyone wants to have.

Exactly, I know GIT quite well, but I couldn't explain SVN at all.

Thorsten wrote:Whereas otherwise I'd have to join the A-320 team, but they might have rules and modeling guidelines which I don't like, I might not be able to do what I want but have to follow team decisions,... and I'd have to make a merge request for my custom graphics effects at which point I might be told to alter them somewhat...

Yes, this is true for our team. We only accept merges which are helpful, and cater to our design plan for the aircraft.

Kind Regards,
Josh
Octal450

Lead Programmer, IDG (Join our Discord!)
Download High Quality Aircraft from Octal450 Hangar
User avatar
Octal450
 
Posts: 4226
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2015 12:51 pm

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Thorsten » Fri Aug 25, 2017 5:37 am

I do believe I am not welcome on the mailing list. If this is no longer the case, then that is new news to me.


I don't think that was ever the case.

It's usually certain behavior that's not welcome, not people. If you are interest in working with the project (which, just as your team, has some guidelines), have a contribution to make and care to interact in a respectful manner with other developers, you're welcome any time. You're not even required to agree with everyone all the time (god knows I don't...) - just to deal with differences in a civilized way.

I suspect you hold a very wrong picture of how this all works - it's a professional environment, it doesn't matter so much whether people like each other personally as long as knowledge is respected.

(I can't give you FGAddon access or guarantee that you get it, but I can tell you with great confidence that you're not likely to ever get it when you never ask...)
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10693
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby camileck » Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:11 am

Thank you for your explanation guys, it really sorted few things out for me. I totally agree with what you presented here. Nevertheless I would like to consider the topic from different perspective - user's one. Introduction - I work as IT sysadmin so I feel quite comfortable with googling, repositories, DOCUMENTATION. Once I start to be interested at something I start reading about it (official docs preferably). That is how I learnt about FG wiki which lead me to the concept of 3rd party hangars and other "fork" projects. But let's assume I am an average user. I do not have experience (this is true about me but it is not the case here :) ) with flight sims but I have my favorite aircraft IRL (eg A320) and I would like to see how it looks like to be a pilot. I download A320 from Launcher. I dont like the model, I dont like interior, I have some knowledge about this certain aircraft systems but simulation of this systems is really poor etc (it is just example, I do not even know yet how A320 from FGAddon looks like! :) ) Seeing this I just give up on FG. If the A320 in default hangar was IDG version (just example, haven't seen it yet) I would really got interested at FG and I would stay with FG for years.

To sum up - once again, I agree with your arguments from developer point of view but IMHO it is not the most comfortable solution when it comes to average user.
camileck
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby CaptB » Fri Aug 25, 2017 9:15 am

camileck wrote in Fri Aug 25, 2017 7:11 am:Seeing this I just give up on FG. If the A320 in default hangar was IDG version (just example, haven't seen it yet) I would really got interested at FG and I would stay with FG for years.


This is how people react, but the fact is that it is the same problem for all other flight simulators. The default Aircraft with FSX and XP, with small exceptions, are poor. A user still needs to find a better alternative on various websites with free aircraft or just pay for a commercial product. The difference between FG and the other is the userbase and exposure, there you have a lot more users and websites advising on what is good and what is not. Another issue is the aircraft rating system that we use, I think it is inaccurate and can be misleading depending on what are your personal standards.
CaptB
 
Posts: 517
Joined: Thu May 23, 2013 6:36 pm
Callsign: EKCH_AP
IRC name: CAPTB
Version: 2018.1
OS: Xubuntu, Win7 64

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Bulldog 1 » Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:29 am

@Wecsje I didn't know there was an other model for the a320, I'd like to see it, i searched it0uchpods in GitHub, and there's other planes, but not the 320
Training on the ground, to flight on the skies.
Road to be a pilot
User avatar
Bulldog 1
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:45 pm
Location: Spain

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Wecsje » Fri Aug 25, 2017 10:39 am

Twitch Streams: https://www.twitch.tv/wecsjelive
Contact methods: Discord (Wecsje#6351), FlightSims United discord (https://discord.me/flightsimsunited), Steam (Wecsje)
Track me on VATSIM: https://vatstats.net/pilots/1397313
User avatar
Wecsje
 
Posts: 204
Joined: Sun Feb 09, 2014 10:13 am
Location: The Closet, Under the Stairs, the Netherlands
Callsign: WS208J
Version: Newest
OS: Windows 10 Pro

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Thorsten » Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:35 pm

Nevertheless I would like to consider the topic from different perspective - user's one.


This may sound harsh, but it's an open-source project - developers usually work on what they're interested in or consider important, user perspective figures only marginally. Unlike in a commercial project where developers get a salary by listening to what users like, here it just creates more work.

In the event, the A-320 team has announced to push the stable version to FGAddon, so you ought to be happy with that. Stuff 'in development' typically is (much) more feature-rich than stuff declared stable, but it also typically has quirks - and like the A-320, several projects in development are on external repositories for that reason.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10693
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby camileck » Fri Aug 25, 2017 1:23 pm

Thorsten wrote in Fri Aug 25, 2017 12:35 pm:
Nevertheless I would like to consider the topic from different perspective - user's one.


This may sound harsh, but it's an open-source project - developers usually work on what they're interested in or consider important, user perspective figures only marginally.


You are not telling me that FG is the project aiming only to entertain its developers, are you? :) I am quite familiar with open-source world so please, do not try to convince me that being open-source does justify not paying attention to User Experience (from my experience open-source attitude is completely opposite to one presented by your opinion). It is nothing personal but I hope I did not understand your post intention, if I understood it correctly, then I hope you are not the voice of all FG developers.

PS. English is not my native language (as all of you have already noticed :) ) so:
a) thats why I am not sure if I got previous post correctly
b) if it sounds like an attack, I am very sorry for that, it was not my intention at all! It is sometimes really hard for me to choose vocabulary that would express my thoughts in the manner I have them in my head :oops: I have so much respect to all FG developers and project as a whole! I wanted my post just to be the part of discussion :)
camileck
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 8:17 pm

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Thorsten » Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:04 pm

You are not telling me that FG is the project aiming only to entertain its developers, are you?


FG is aiming to create a realistic open-source flight simulation - says so in the mission statement. Typically people become developers because they share that goal - to the degree that users expect different things from the developers (to name a few which have been brought up - simplified flight dynamics, missions and rankings,...) they tend to be disappointed.

Otherwise it's simple - why would people do things they're not personally interested in in their spare time when they can code instead things they are genuinely interested in? Or, to make it more concrete - why would I possibly change a GIT devel repository to something less technical because users ask for something more simple and accessible when it works for me?
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10693
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Bulldog 1 » Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:42 pm




It doesn't work to me, it appears nothing, and then the program close
Training on the ground, to flight on the skies.
Road to be a pilot
User avatar
Bulldog 1
 
Posts: 84
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 2:45 pm
Location: Spain

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby Necolatis » Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:47 pm

When you have unzipped it, you must remove the '-master' part of the folder name.
"Airplane travel is nature's way of making you look like your passport photo."
— Al Gore


Hangar: https://sites.google.com/site/fghangar/
User avatar
Necolatis
 
Posts: 1917
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 12:40 am
Location: EKOD
Callsign: Leto
IRC name: Neco
Version: 2019.1.1
OS: Windows 10

Re: FG best developed airliner

Postby camileck » Fri Aug 25, 2017 3:05 pm

Thorsten wrote in Fri Aug 25, 2017 2:04 pm:
You are not telling me that FG is the project aiming only to entertain its developers, are you?


FG is aiming to create a realistic open-source flight simulation - says so in the mission statement. Typically people become developers because they share that goal - to the degree that users expect different things from the developers (to name a few which have been brought up - simplified flight dynamics, missions and rankings,...) they tend to be disappointed.

Otherwise it's simple - why would people do things they're not personally interested in in their spare time when they can code instead things they are genuinely interested in? Or, to make it more concrete - why would I possibly change a GIT devel repository to something less technical because users ask for something more simple and accessible when it works for me?


I fully agree with what you said here. My point is what are the criteria of selection of airctafts available from Launcher (FGAddon) so that sometimes more advanced (better developed) aircrafts are not the default ones? (ofc apart of those with license conflict)
Last edited by camileck on Fri Aug 25, 2017 3:09 pm, edited 2 times in total.
camileck
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 8:17 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Flying

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest