What I meant is that, when Gingin's improvements will be merged, I think we should keep the default hst.xml file with the real Hubble parameters, even if the insertion cannot be perfect due to the inclination.
Okay, everyone take a deep breath.
There's the standard thing with merge requests which inevitably seems to happen with people who start making them. What they should be (if you ever get to review one, you'll quickly understand why) is a series of small, incremental changes of one thing that can easily be viewed and okayed within a few minutes.
What they should not be is one big mix of 'everything I thought needs improving' - because it takes forever to go through all of the gory details and make sure that there's no hidden easter egg contained within an otherwise perfectly reasonable merge request that will bite real hard eventually.
You're inside a thread dealing with PFD adjustments - and you're asking for the orbital elements of HST to be changed. So what on earth has that got to do with anything in this thread?
Right now I'm seeing a merge request of 19 (!) separate commits all lumped together into one thing I have to either accept or veto as a whole (by the way, please give me a short PM when making a request - for some weird reason, SF doesn't notify me any more
) - that's not how this is done efficiently.
Please, please - let us break this down into small, logical units, merge it one by one, discuss one issue at a time. And please do not throw 'everything I've ever wanted to have' into the fray.
I know everyone is enthusiastic and eager - and I'm happy that is so, and I am 90% convinced it's all good and okay, but... honest mistakes happen. I've been there and disabled FGData myself with a bad commit for a few days.
So please let's just do this by the book and break it down into a series of small, easy to understand changes.
It's really how this is generally done in OpenSource, nothing personal.