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

 b023 said "who is to decide what aircraft are in what
state."

I suggest an entirely undemocratic autocratic decision by a couple of the
senior devs.

Far better to get something done and some gains achieved and ask for
forgiveness later.
otherwise we sit around endlessly debating in case someone gets hurty feels
and absolutely zilch is done to move us forward.

As for the main users being devs, have you looked at the numbers of rip-off
CDs of Flightgear on Ebay etc? somebody is buying them and it isnt devs.
The fact they are being sold at al means our communications were not good
enough in the first place  - but thats by the by and off-topic for this
convo  -- sorry

On Mon, 25 May 2026 at 13:22, bo23 via Flightgear-devel <
[email protected]> wrote:

> On 2026-05-25 11:28 +0100, Willie Fleming wrote:
> > How about a popup on the likes of the A380 and similar along the lines of
> > "This aircraft is buggy and unmaintained so please dont expect perfection
> > This does not mean you cannot have fun with it and we encourage you to
> try
> > it out anyway. Then if you think you can help here's how... <link to dev
> > resources>
>
> This sounds plausible, but who is to decide what aircraft are in what
> state. Furthermore, only the developers of the aircraft would be in
> charge to link to "dev resources", the place they want the development
> to take place.  There are actually fields in the detailed view of the
> aircraft for at least 'Website', 'support/issues', 'Wikipedia', see how
> the A320 does this... Well, the authors of the A320 did that.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Flightgear-devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
>


-- 
Regards
Willie Fleming

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