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

Everyone is a "user" at one time or another, even as a developer. Think of
it this way. You are developing a program, an app. In the process, you need
to install or build a library. In doing so, you download the required
library or source and then find missing depencies, or that something is
broken and now need to spend a lot of time trying to fix and resolve the
issue(s). Sure, that's what developers do. But, it's not really what you
want to do now, it's not a path you want to go down. In this scenario,
sure, you are a developer, but from the perspective of installing something
your project needs, you are a user. And when it is broken, it interferes
with what your goal is. This is the user perspective.

Maybe I'm going off the deep end, but perhaps FG needs a user QA group.
Their contribution would be to provide the user perspective and offer
input. Again, maybe this is going too far afield, but I kind of think that
something needs to be done at some point to address this.

Thanks kindly,
Dave

On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 8:13 AM David Hudach <[email protected]> wrote:

> 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