Re: The endless influx of low-quality, low-realism, quantity-over-quality aircraft into FGAddon

I find this true, troubling, puzzling and frustrating: "*Some of you for
some reason can not see the end user perspective ....*"

On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 7:56 AM SP-NTX -FlightGear <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I made 100 aircrafts called blue-yellow-glider[1-100], they are all
> different and should be added as separate aircrafts, also I rate them 6/5
>
> What I mean by this is why in the hell you consider FGAddon being a
> sandbox the only viable option? I would perfectly understand it had it been
> the only easy option to download/host aircraft. Nowadays there are more
> tutorials on how to download aircraft from github gitlab etc. and I believe
> almost everyone has flown in aircraft downloaded from outside the FGAddon.
> By having *any* kind of guidelines for FGAddon other than "do whatever you
> want #freedom as long as GNU GPL' it would dramatically improve the end
> user experience. Someone made some Code of Conduct of FG a few days ago
> where it is PRECISELY differentiated between the contributors/users role in
> the project. Some of you for some reason can not see the end user
> perspective, despite the fact I clearly stated it in the first post.
>
> Let's be real, no one will do anything about the issue whatsoever. You
> know what? Give me the commit access to FGAddon, I can rate the aircrafts,
> all of them. I have no heart whatsoever, I go by guidelines only, even if
> it means giving 1/5 rating.
>
> If we want a rating to solve the issue:
> 1. Ratings have to be visible on the aircraft browsing page, not only
> after clicking it.
> 2. There needs to be a visible label whether the aircraft is Yasim or
> JSBSim. One could argue they won't understand, trust me when they see
> aircraft with (Yasim) in the name after some time they understand to avoid
> it.
> 3. New rating requirements need to be made, focusing more on realism, even
> if current 4/5 FDM aircraft will become 2
>
> FGAddon on flightgear wiki is regarded as the official FlightGear Hangar.
> Why do you think turning it into a complete sandbox is a viable option?
>
> Regards,
> SP-NTX
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>

_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel