FlightGear wiki:Village pump: Difference between revisions

From FlightGear wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(278 intermediate revisions by 18 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Archives|[[/Archive 2012|2012]]|[[/Archive 2013|2013]]|[[/Archive 2014|2014]]}}
__NEWSECTIONLINK__
{{Archives|[[/Archive 2012|2012]]|[[/Archive 2013|2013]]|[[/Archive 2014|2014]]|[[/Archive 2015|2015]]|[[/Archive 2016|2016]]|[[/Archive 2017|2017]]|[[/Archive 2018|2018]]|[[/Archive 2019|2019]]|[[/Archive 2020|2020]]|[[/Archive 2021|2021]]|[[/Archive 2022|2022]]}}
{{shortcut|FGW:VP}}
{{shortcut|FGW:VP}}
Welcome to the '''Village Pump'''. This page is used to discuss the technical issues, operations and guidelines of the [[FlightGear wiki]].
Welcome to the '''Village Pump'''. This page is used to discuss the technical issues, operations and guidelines of the [[FlightGear wiki]].


Please <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit&section=new}} add new topics]</span> to the '''bottom''' of this page.
Please <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:{{FULLPAGENAME}}|action=edit&section=new}} add new topics]</span> to the '''bottom''' of this page.


Old discussion should be moved to a [[FlightGear wiki:Village pump/Archive YEAR]]. These discussions can then be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate.
Old discussions should be moved to a [[FlightGear wiki:Village pump/Archive YEAR]]. These discussions can then be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate.
 
== Navigation links added to FlightGear Newsletter header ==
 
As per [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=25104 request by Michat on the forum] I have now managed to add navigation links to the FlightGear Newsletter header, {{tl|Newsletter-header}}, pointing to the previous and next months newsletter.
 
So far I have only added it to the latest header though.
 
Happy browsing! :-)
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 19:48, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
 
 
: Looking into the older template, {{tl|Newsletter}}, I have seen a fundamental difference.  The new one, {{tl|Newsletter-header}}, uses a parameter, '''edition''', that I have used to get working links to the previous and following editions.
 
: It seems that a similar behavior can not be added to the older template without adding a similar parameter to it and all older editions of the newsletter.  I simply can not figure out a way to parse the page name into a date. :-\
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 10:05, 23 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== MediaWiki updated to 1.24.1 ==
 
I've updated MediaWiki to the latest stable release (1.24.1) today. There is a small issue with some of the extensions not displaying icons, so some of them have been disabled for the moment. I hope to have them re-enabled later today. Please report bugs if you find any. For a list of changes, see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Release_notes/1.24
 
[[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 12:00, 1 February 2015 (EST)
 
: It seems that Nasal syntax highlighting via Geshi is no longer working (I think it was Philosopher who came up with the module...)?
: --[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 15:58, 1 February 2015 (EST)
 
:: Ah, didn't move that one over. Should be fixed now.
:: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 16:19, 1 February 2015 (EST)
 
::: Confirmed fixed.  Thank you for the quick fix.  :-D
::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 16:49, 1 February 2015 (EST)
 
== Support SVG file ==
 
Is there some securty issues/software limitations (no plugin's installed) why the wiki don't support uploads of SVG images?
 
[[User:Www2|Www2]] ([[User talk:Www2|talk]]) 21:02, 4 February 2015 (EST)
 
== If you find missing images ==
 
In case you find missing images have a look at this page: [[FlightGear wiki:Missing images]].
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 23:51, 7 February 2015 (EST)
 
== Additional Portals ==
Given the recent interest in doing embedded development related to FlightGear (Arduino/Rasberry PI), I was thinking that we might want to introduce dedicated portals for such use-cases,  to keep things neatly organized, but also to provide a place to grow this further - e.g. depending on how this goes, we could have portals covering:
* Embedded/Hardware (including cockpit building)
* UAVs
 
Equally, we may want to provide sub-forums for these two topics, which should help clean up the offtopic/development forum, too. Currently, the SUPPORT/HARDWARE forum is being used for many of these topics, even though that was originally intended for joysticks/yokes and pedals related stuff - not custom hardware, which would fit better under DEVELOPMENT in my opinon.
 
As far as I can tell there are roughly 10-15 contributors actively exploring embedded development including UAV stuff - so I guess it would be a good idea for the project (i.e. the forum and the wiki) to provide some structure to "house" such efforts.
 
thoughts/ideas ?
--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 06:17, 10 February 2015 (EST)
 
== Wiki extensions observations ==
 
Hi all,
 
Recently I was looking at the [[Special:Version#Installed extensions|installed extensions]], and noticed the below:
 
; [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SmoothGallery SmoothGallery]
: It appears that it doesn't work anymore on this wiki.  For instance, the below code …
<nowiki><sgallery>
Glass01.jpg
Glass07.jpg
Glass11.jpg
</sgallery></nowiki>
: … causes the following error:
 
: Notice: Undefined variable: args in /home/wiki/wiki/extensions/SmoothGallery/SmoothGallery.php on line 113 Fatal error: Call to undefined method LocalFile::getThumbnail() in /home/wiki/wiki/extensions/SmoothGallery/SmoothGalleryParser.php on line 208
 
: This could be related to extension's [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:SmoothGallery#Fixing_bugs bugs].
 
: I suggest this extension be removed because
# As far as I know, it's not used on any of the wiki's pages.
# Is it needed?
# Its ''unstable'' as of 22 March, 2015, which means it's broken and shouldn't be used ([http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension_status link]).
 
; [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:EmbedVideo EmbedVideo]
: According to the [http://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=Extension:EmbedVideo&oldid=1447164 page revision as of 16 March 2015], there were XSS flaws in version 2.2.4 and earlier of the extension.  It should probably be updated to the latest revision.
 
[[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 14:08, 22 March 2015 (EDT)
 
: Both are done. Thanks for reporting!
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 17:21, 24 March 2015 (EDT)
 
== Boeing 777 Cleanup ==
 
Just wrapping up cleaning up Boeing 777 articles that I discussed a full year ago. All now redirect centrally to that page. This makes for a lot less segregated wiki. Looking at it, it would appear that very little happens on the individual pages and the content on them is relatively insignificant. The stuff that is needed I copied over to the main page. Will try to add some pictures as well.
 
If anybody has any objections, speak up :)
 
 
: It would be really useful to merge the pages ''if'' the aircraft are similar in many ways, for example:
:* All part of the same aircraft package
:* Same or similar usage, for example
:** Keyboard shortcuts
:** Custom dialogs
:** Clickable cockpit interfaces
:* Same levels of system modeling
 
: If they could be handled pretty much the same way and was part of the same aircraft package I don't think I would have any objections.
 
: However, if they differ a lot in the areas mentioned above I think it would not be a good idea to merge the pages; the aircraft would be dissimilar enough that the page would have to be uncomfortably long and possibly confusing if it were to describe the different workings.
 
: If they are not part of the same aircraft package, looking into the similarities and differences and slowly work towards integrating them into the same aircraft package could also bee a good idea.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:48, 5 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== Aircraft Page Organization ==
I just started a [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=72&t=26161 topic] over on the forum on how posts are organized if somebody has input.
 
{{unsigned|11:45, 5 May 2015|Manfred}}
 
 
: I think it would probably be better to discuss the quality and organization of the wiki right here (on this very page) than on the forum.
 
: The main two reasons for that is (1) to keep the wiki quality discussions here and (2) that it would be a bit more transparent to do it that way.
 
: The transparency is important in that it would make it easier to later look into ''why'' things were decided to be in a certain way and ''who'' said ''what'' and ''when''.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 08:07, 5 May 2015 (EDT)
 
Alright, so here goes:
 
By the nature of FlightGear, multiple people might work on different projects covering the same areas. For instance, there are 2 different projects covering the Boeing 787. This makes overview and indexing very difficult. Wikipedia is designed to only really have one article on a topic (i.e. aircraft) that can be extended.
 
For instance:
 
{{Airbus}}
 
It is dreadfully unclear on the overview of aircraft. In my opinion, it would make more sense to get an disambiguation page on the various 'packages' that contain the A319 for instance. The multiple entries greatly diminishes the value of the list.
 
Here are a few ideas:
* '''Give aircraft a codeword or project name.''' For instance, the Boeing 787 (Dream Project) or Boeing 787 (GPL Project) to distinguish between them. Then list them like that in the index as well. When you both have a --aircraft= A319 and A319-131, what are you going to do when the next person comes around and wants to design an A319? It would make more sense to migrate to a structure of say B787-8-Dream and B787-8-GPL. If you make a piece of software, you're not going to go calling your software 'Conference Manager', with the next person making the similar stuff calling it 'Conference Manager 2', but rather ConferenceTime and and ConferenceMaster. Naming your work after aircraft in the current way gets bloody confusing.
 
* I imagine that perhaps as a bit of a continuation of the above, '''people try to distinguish between their models by giving them very specific names, such as Boeing 707-338'''. I realize that people want to work on it themselves, but from a broader perspective, how much technical difference is there really between these? The A319 should also work with the corresponding changes as a A320- it is an identical cockpit and much the same fuselage. IMHO, it should have been filed as an A320 instead with only one model, an A319. As for the Boeing, give it a codeword, such as Boeing 707 (Qantas Project). It even makes it more marketable.
 
* '''Clearly distinguish between current and past development in the template''', i.e. add a new index on the left that contains both categories. I find that not doing any work on the model in five years qualifies for past development.
 
The ability to grow is proportional to the ability to handle the increase in information. While this perhaps happens mostly on aircraft articles, what happens if somebody wants a fresh start on that airport scenery? How does he name the page and organize it in relation to the current one? It would have been easier to name both after some town landmark so one the second one came around, you could easily categorise them.
 
In a nutshell:
* Give all aircraft projects a name after the aircraft type ("Boeing 787"+ Phoenix, Dream, Toulouse...+ Project) to distinguish between individual development.
* Sort all aircraft by model type (i.e. A320) rather than the sub-model being worked on (i.e. A319).
 
[[User:Manfred|Manfred]] ([[User talk:Manfred|talk]]) 11:56, 5 May 2015 (EDT)
 
 
: You have several good points there.  I have some thoughts on them (note that this this is only my opinions).
:; Disambiguation pages:  This could probably be used on an aircraft type level basis.  For example describing the Boeing 777 in general and short descriptions of the 'subtypes' and links to pages with them and any different variants. To some extent this could be given a standardized look by using templates.
:: I think these could be very useful, and I wish there was some of them.
:; The navigation template:  Dreadful at least to some extent.  I have more than once found them a bit inconsistent and confusing (in particular when looking like the one you showed here).  Could probably be remade quite a bit, possibly following the structure I outlined in the point above.
:; Project names:  I have noted that a few projects have had names, for example the ''Lake of Constance Boeing 707'' or the ''Seattle'' (though I embarrassingly do not remember what aircraft type that was).
:; Distinguish between past and current development:  Probably a good idea.  Could possibly be done with color coded backgrounds for the aircraft type text and color coding of the development state field in the aircraft infobox.
 
: Some additional thoughts:
:* I guess the navigation templates could also be link to the aircraft disambiguation pages when needed.
:* Setting up a style manual for the disambiguation pages and navigation templates would probably be a good idea.  It should not be done before some time of experimentation though.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 12:40, 5 May 2015 (EDT)
 
===Action Plan===
 
It's good to see that we are on the same page. To complete this:
 
* I propose that we start with the Boeing aircraft as a model project.
* We need a name structure for all aircraft that is universal and unique. Otherwise the reorganization will be in vain. As suggested earlier, along the lines of [Manufacturer, Model, Project Name]. The problem is that last one. I called the 787 'GPL' and 'Dreamliner' but I don't like any of those and would much rather give them something that is really not connected to any other aircraft of the name it itself. I'd propose 'Seattle' and 'Firebird' but I don't want to go renaming all the aircraft myself. I think it's something the developers should come up with. The aircraft would not be renamed A319 Toulouse Project, because the fact that it is an A319 is insignificant in that it uses much the same fuselage and identical cockpit as the A320. Only a significant model code should be included. Less of a problem with Boeing but this has to work everywhere.
* I am really not sure about putting the background history on a separate page and I'm tempted to say we should leave that to Wikipedia. I think it would be better just to make it to a disambiguation page.
 
[[User:Manfred|Manfred]] ([[User talk:Manfred|talk]]) 16:38, 5 May 2015 (EDT)
 
 
: For the disambiguation pages I was more thinking along the lines of for example [[Boeing 707]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Boeing_707&oldid=63942 permalink]) and [[Boeing 747]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Boeing_747&oldid=62527 permalink]), but with maybe shorter general descriptions and a one-liner or short paragraph describing each variant. An [[User:Johan G/Aircraft series|early draft of one possible way]] to do it have been added to my [[User:Johan G/In my sandbox|sandbox]].
 
: To my slight frustration the {{tl|Boeing}} template is more consistent and logical than the {{tl|Airbus}} template (in essence less 'messy').  Some of my thoughts on how to improve it (and probably other ones as well) turned into a puff of smoke when I saw it.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 09:53, 6 May 2015 (EDT)
 
:: While I do agree that disambiguation pages are an important step on the way, they are not the solution to the problem. People working on very similar aircraft differentiate their by minimalistic changes in their model name, but this is subject to change as people add different variations of that aircraft based off the same cockpit for instance. It has to be 'robust' in that regard. That is why the unique identifier in the form of a 'project name' or an equivalent solution is necessary, especially for the Airbus aircraft as can be seen. Even if there's only one model at the moment, since there's no harm in doing so because somebody might come along and start some new work. But giving them a name only here won't be very clear and would ideally occur for all use 'globally' in FlightGear.
 
:: [[User:Manfred|Manfred]] ([[User talk:Manfred|talk]]) 12:18, 6 May 2015 (EDT)
 
 
::: I can only agree to that the disambiguation pages are not the solution.  Regarding those I am rather thinking of consistent style and intuitive navigation (as in more effortless for the reader).
 
::: Ideally (as in an utopia) aircraft should be merged or better ones replace older ones, at least in regard to the official aircraft (in essence those available from the download page).  But waiting for the utopia differentiating between them using project names is probably the best way.
 
::: Maybe we <s>&ensp;could&ensp;</s> should encourage people to use project names in those cases when they can not merge aircraft (for example due to licenses etc).  Using project names consistently, as you seem to suggest, is would probably work well.  Also, people tend to copy other peoples way of doing things.
 
::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 12:52, 6 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== Bug report specific article(s) ==
To my surprise there is no [[Submitting bug reports]] article (or [[Responding to bug reports]] for that matter), and I remind myself that the relevant information is spread throughout the wiki instead of being summed up in one place.
 
Some things to consider when writing it (kind of a 'note to self' for now):
 
* The bug reports themselves:
** What bugs should be reported where?
*** FlightGear itself
*** Aircraft, vehicles etc.
*** Airports
*** Scenery
** What information might be needed?
** What kind of responses should be expected?
 
* Target groups?
** Non-native English speaking computer novices?
** Regular FlightGear users?
** FlightGear developers?
 
* Concepts could also be borrowed from from:
** Eric Steven Raymond, [http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html How To Ask Questions The Smart Way]
** Amy Hoy, [http://slash7.com/2006/12/22/vampires/ Help Vampires: A Spotter’s Guide], in particular the section ''Reforming the Help Vampire''
** Karl Fogel, Producing Open Source Software, [http://producingoss.com/en/bug-tracker.html Bug Tracker]
 
* Last, but not least:  What formal and informal guidelines, rules and procedures do we actually have?
 
It would be quite preferable from a maintenance perspective to have that information gathered to only a few places and only describe the concepts briefly before linking to those articles, also from the forum and mailing list (in essence DRY – Don't Repeat Yourself).
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 18:23, 10 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== Most helicopter screenshots are now categorized ==
 
With some few exceptions all helicopter screenshots are now categorized in [[:Category:Screenshots of helicopters]] and its subcategories.  ''Tip: Test clicking the blue triangles.  ;-)''
 
What I am trying to achieve is to separate files and articles and to put the files into a browseable category structure (sort of like a tree with some spider webs here and there between the branches).  That way they should be easier to find for example when looking for the next [[:Category:Picture of the week|picture of the week]] or a good illustration for an article.
 
The exception is the files that have gotten a [[:Category:Copyright statuses|license category]], but is not categorized in any other relevant category, are not used in an article and/or does not have a descriptive file name.
 
:''See also [[FlightGear wiki:Village pump/Archive 2014#Having separate image categories or not?]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=FlightGear_wiki:Village_pump/Archive_2014&oldid=81713#Having_separate_image_categories_or_not.3F permalink])''
 
I am ''very'' slowly working on adding {{tl|file information}} templates, descriptions, links and categories to uncategorized files, with the long term goal of not having any files that not can be found by browsing logical and consistent categories.
 
Good file names, descriptions, categories and internal linking are all four good 'white hat' search engine optimization (SEO) strategies, in essence making it easier to find what you are looking for.  Be that using the wiki's search engine or an external one such as Google search.
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:00, 14 May 2015 (EDT)
 
== Disambiguating the two Space Shuttle pages ==
 
I would like to hear some ideas of how to disambiguate the two Space Shuttle articles, [[Space Shuttle]] originally about the 3D model-less FGData Space Shuttle re-entry FDM but now about the shuttle by the [[FlightGear space program]], and [[SpaceShuttle - Project Overview‎]] modified from that one.
 
Preferably they could be differentiated by different project names or something like that.
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 12:22, 19 May 2015 (EDT)
 
: Hi Johan,
: My two cents are as follows ('''HW''' = HerbyW Space Shuttle, '''TH''' = Thorsten Space Shuttle):
:{| class="wikitable" width="75%"
! Shuttle variant !! Suggestion !! Comments
|-
| HW
| Space Shuttle (FlightGear Space Program)
| Too long?
|-
| HW
| Space Shuttle (FG Space Program)
| Again, too long?
|-
| HW
| Space Shuttle (Space Program)
| Would make people think that the Space Shuttle is the name of a space program.
|-
| TH
| Space Shuttle (official)
| Don't like this one myself.  Also, might be too controversial.
|-
! colspan="3" style="text-align: center" | Favoured by me
|-
| HW
| Space Shuttle (FGSP)
| None
|-
| TH
| Space Shuttle
| None
|}
 
: Also, idea for disambiguation text (assuming my favoured suggestions above):
<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap"><nowiki>The Space Shuttle could either refer to …
* The [[Space Shuttle (FGSP)|Space Shuttle]] developed from the original Shuttle by {{usr|HerbW}} ''et al'' for the [[FlightGear Space Program]].
* The [[Space Shuttle]] further developed from the above by {{usr|Thorsten}} ''et al'' with new, more realistic [[FDM]]. This is the Space Shuttle that is included in the [[FGAddon]] repository.</nowiki></pre>
 
: I hope these suggestions are helpful.
: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 15:50, 19 May 2015 (EDT)
 
 
:: First off I will apologize for the late reply.
 
:: I think I consider it a good idea to move the current [[Space Shuttle]] article to [[Space Shuttle (FG Space Program)]], moving [[Space Shuttle - Project overview]] there instead, and keep the [[Space Shuttle (disambiguation)]] page describing both in a few lines.  I think that "FGSP" would be a bit too cryptic for the "uninitiated", but that most users would be able to figure out "FG".
 
:: The new [[Space Shuttle]] and [[Space Shuttle (FG Space Program)]] should most probably point to the disambiguation page rather than each other.
 
:: Though not really a part of the reply, it is for the record perhaps worth repeating that the current [[Space Shuttle]] article previously described the fgdata (later FGAddons) one, but was changed to describe the [[FlightGear space program]]/HerbieW/[[FGMEMBERS]] one (see [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Space_Shuttle&diff=next&oldid=81334 diff]).
 
:: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 18:03, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
 
 
::: Hi.
::: Personally, I think if we just called Thorsten's (alright, Thorsten, just to eliminate confusion) shuttle's  article "Space Shuttle", then did a blurb at the top such as,"For Jon Berndt's model-less fdm and HerbyW's early model, see HERE and HERE".
::: Just another two pennies towards a dollar
::: [[User:Adam|Adam]] ([[User talk:Adam|talk]]) 18:28, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
 
 
:::: Psst, that Red Leader and I mention one as related to the [[FlightGear Space Program]] is that both at least was based on Jon Bernt's atmospheric entry FDM and HerbyW's 3D model. ;-)
:::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 18:59, 21 July 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::Well, of course, ideally we want [[SpaceShuttle - Project Overview]] To just be called Space Shuttle (for purposes of putting best foot--or wing, as the case may be--forward.) Then perhaps we could call Herby's shuttle "Space Shuttle--Model", and the FDM "Space Shuttle-FDM". That makes four cents so far.[[User:Adam|Adam]] ([[User talk:Adam|talk]]) 11:03, 22 July 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::: {{done}} I have now moved the Space Shuttle articles.
 
:::::: I settled for [[Space Shuttle]] and [[Space Shuttle (FG Space Program)]].
 
:::::: I have also changed links here and there so they point to each or the other variant to avoid confusion.
 
:::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:52, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
 
== How do I load Cessna 152 on to FSX (2015) on OS X macbook ==
 
Hi I hope you can help. I'm a new user of FlightGear and training for my PPL.
I have software loaded on my macbook and have tried out the C172 but I want the Cessna 152 that I'm doing lessons in.
I've tried to download from disc but I can't do it. I searched online and can only find an add on for PCs.
 
Could you tell me where I can find it to download and step by step instructions please?
 
Z
 
{{unsigned|19:51, 14 June 2015|Zedbee}}
 
 
: You would probably get good answers if you register to the [http://forum.flightgear.org/ forum] and ask in the [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewforum.php?f=21 Mac subforum].
 
: P.S. You can not use FSX aircraft directly in FlightGear, at the other hand there is probably at least one available for FlightGear.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 16:36, 14 June 2015 (EDT)
 
== Rename Template ==
Do we have a template which alerts admins to a rename request?
[[Avoiding Multiple Downloads of FGData]] could have on Linux tagged on, while the EDDK article needs rename to Flüghafen Koln / Bonn (EDDK) and the "AV8R 2nd Throttle as Pan Speed" AV8R Should be Aviator...
[[User:Legoboyvdlp|Legoboyvdlp]] ([[User talk:Legoboyvdlp|talk]]) 15:42, 7 July 2015 (EDT)
 
: There is no need to call in admins for "renaming" or rather ''moving'' articles. ;-)
 
: If you hover over or click on the down arrow between the "More" label and the search box to the top right of the page you will see the option "Move", which is wiki jargon for "rename".  Before starting to move pages, have a peek at [http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=FlightGear_wiki:Manual_of_Style&oldid=75296#Article_titles FlightGear wiki:Manual of Style#Article titles] (it is a short section).
 
: {{inote|Please leave a redirect behind even if there is no wiki pages linking to that article.  There may be links to that page outside the wiki.}}
 
: Slightly off topic now, but maybe useful later:  To move a category you would have to move the category page '''and''' edit all the pages in that category so the category link points to the new category.  See also [[Help:Categories]].
 
: You can see the difference in what regular users and admins can do at [[Special:ListGroupRights]].
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 13:15, 9 July 2015 (EDT)
 
:: Questions like these are probably also a good reason to improve the help pages in regard to using the wiki.
:: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:02, 16 August 2015 (EDT)
 
== Template:Dmbox and the disambiguation categories ==
It seems {{tl|dmbox}} adds several categories to each disambiguation page it is used on.  In addition {{tl|disambiguation}}, which uses that template, add one category further.
 
I would say that the "All ..." is superfluous as well.  Also, currently none of the categories have a parent category.
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:26, 12 July 2015 (EDT)
 
== Description of the FlightGear screenshot categories ==
{{hatnote|Regarding the new article [[FlightGear wiki:FlightGear screenshot categories]].}}
 
I have now written together a description of how I have organized the [[:Category:FlightGear screenshots|FlightGear screenshot categories]] ([[Special:CategoryTree/FlightGear screenshots|tree]]) and the rationale behind them.  I think I have been working on categorizing the images and in particular the screenshots uploaded to this wiki since even before the village pump was here, but I have never really tried to explain what it was all about.
 
I would encourage everyone to have a look at it, in particular if you more or less regularly upload screenshots to the wiki.
 
I do encourage leaving feedback on the [[FlightGear wiki talk:FlightGear screenshot categories|discussion page]]. However, I also want to point out that this is a de facto description and that ''some'' aspects of how the screenshots actually are organized probably cannot be changed without requiring literally man-months of work, even if some things can be done by [[User:BotFlightGear|robot]].
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:18, 19 July 2015 (EDT)
 
== MediaWiki updated to 1.25.1 ==
 
I've updated MediaWiki to the latest stable release (1.25.1) today. Please report bugs if you find any. For a list of changes, see https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Release_notes/1.25
 
[[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 07:10, 10 August 2015 (EDT)
 
=== 08/2015: Nasal syntax highlighting no longer working since update ===
I don't think any of us mere mortals can do anything about that, but you literally need to have superuser powers (Gijs, Simon, Curt) ?
<syntaxhighlight lang="nasal">
if(var foo = 1 or die(nil) ) {
nil;
}
</syntaxhighlight>
 
--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 07:12, 25 August 2015 (EDT)
 
: From some research, it appears that this was broken due to the SyntaxHighlight_GeSHi extension switching from GeSHi to [http://pygments.org/ Pygments], reason being that Pygments is better maintained (see diff summary).
:* [https://git.wikimedia.org/commitdiff/mediawiki%2Fextensions%2FSyntaxHighlight_GeSHi/6484894497f59080eb3e62da4d11b658c84e19f4 Git diff changing GeSHi to Pygments]
:* [http://pygments.org/languages/ Pygments supported languages list]
:* [http://pygments.org/docs/lexerdevelopment/ Writing custom languages in Pygments]
: Hope this helps,
: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 16:02, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
 
: Sorry, I simply forgot to re-include our custom Nasal config after the update, just like last time :(
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 08:59, 15 September 2015 (EDT)
 
=== 10/2015: Live preview feature does not enable Save page button ===
Since the introduction of the "live preview" feature on the wiki, clicking on the '''Show preview''' button only shows the live preview at the top of the page - the '''Save page''' button remains disabled. This makes saving pages impossible (unless the user has the appropriate privilege on the wiki or the button is enabled manually e.g. via Firebug).
-- [[User:Elgaton|ElGaton]] ([[User talk:Elgaton|Contact me]]) 14:11, 10 October 2015 (EDT)
 
: Thanks for the report! Live Preview was disabled by default, so most users will not have run into this problem. I've now disabled the forced preview, so you can use Live Preview if you like.
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 08:42, 11 October 2015 (EDT)
 
== Repository link templates ==
:''Moved here from [[Template talk:Repo link#Todo list]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Template_talk:Repo_link&oldid=87147#Todo_list perm]), since discussion got more general.''
 
'''To do'''
* {{tl|Repo link}}
** Protocols (e.g., <code><nowiki>git://</nowiki></code>, see [[#Supporting different protocols|above]])
** Add Mercurial to repo types
** GitLab option
** Standardize label style (when label is not customized).
** Download links
 
'''Started by''' [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]])
 
: I think those are all good ideas.  I added {{tl|readme file}} the other day.  As I was just looking at {{tl|repo link}} to add links to relevant source code files related to the [[Conditions]] article I got reminded by the beauty of less typing. ;-)
 
: In addition I was also reminded about that a more specific template is easier to update when a repository move.  Consider for example if {{tl|repo link}} would be used as I mentioned above, linking to a source code file related to an article.  If that repository would be moved again or get another URL structure ''all'' links to that repository would have to be updated.
 
: A more specific link at the other hand, say {{obr}}simgear file{{cbr}} would only require that specific template to be changed.  In addition all links to any of those source files would have the same style, which to some extent will making them more intuitive.
 
: In essence, more specific link templates should:
:* Require less typing
:* Require less maintenance
:* Give a more consistent style
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:06, 20 May 2015 (EDT)
 
 
: Some more thoughts on the sub-templates for links to source files in the git repos, and one for the FGAddon svn repo.
:* Source file/directory templates:
:** Should we use one more or an entirely different meta template, say {{obr}}source file{{cbr}}, to give them a consistent style, for example prefix (FlightGear, SimGear, FGData, etc), showing/not showing full path, etc), instead of doing that in each template?
:** Always or often used parameters should probably not be named parameters
:*** I guess always and often used parameters are path and commit
:*** Other parameters?
:** Template names, how about:
:*** {{obr}}flightgear source{{cbr}}
:*** {{obr}}simgear source{{cbr}}
:*** {{obr}}fgdata source{{cbr}}
:** Should default to root directory of repo rather than throw an error.
:* Aircraft repo template(s) (slightly off topic):
:** How about {{obr}}fgaddon aircraft{{cbr}}
:** Should default to <code>..trunk/aircraft/</code> rather than throw an error.
:* Aircraft URL templates:
:** Needed for a completely different purpose than source links, namely URLs in infoboxes.
:** Would lessen maintenance ''considerably'' if a repo/hangar moves.
:** How about {{tlx|fgaddon aircraft url|''aircraft''|''revision''}}
:** I guess in the same way link templates for other common repos/hangars are added, for example:
:*** {{obr}}fgmembers aircraft url{{cbr}}
:*** {{obr}}helijah aircraft url{{cbr}}
:*** {{obr}}fguk aircraft url{{cbr}}
:** Big question:  Download URL or info page URL?
:** When given no params:  Link to root directory/hangar main page or throw an error?
:* A category for the templates say ''Category:Repository link templates'' with templates and meta templates could be a good idea.
 
: Why do I argue for always or often used parameters to be ''unnamed parameters''?  And only ''lowercase names'' for the templates?  ''Quicker typing''.  Simple as that.  At least with these templates.
 
: If you guys think this would be ok I could start adding templates right away, probably starting with aircraft URL templates.
 
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 06:27, 26 May 2015 (EDT)
 
:: Hi Johan,
:: Sorry for the delayed reply.
:: Just checking, am I right in saying that you're suggesting that there should be a template for Git repos and a separate one for FGAddon (an SVN repo)?  It's just a bit hard to read what you mean above.  Anyway, apart from that, here's my feedback:
::* '''Oft used parameters:''' Using unnamed parameters is good idea.  The parameters that would commonly be used would be <code>site</code>, <code>proj</code>, and <code>path</code>. I don't think <code>commit</code> is used as much, though.
::* '''Defaulting:''' Where possible, it's probably best to use defaulting, rather than throwing errors.
::* '''Aircraft URL templates:''' Another good idea.
::** We should probably link to info page URL.  Linking directly to download may catch users out when it automatically starts downloading.
::** http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=42&t=26167 ;)
::* '''New category:''' Agree.
::* '''Upper/lowercase names:''' Yeah, we should use lowercase names, especially in the documentation.
::* '''Name suggestions''' I think ''repo'' instead of ''source'' should be used.  It's less typing and a bit more descriptive.  Also, {{obr}}fgaddon repo{{cbr}}?  URL template names are fine to me, though.
 
:: Also, do you have any suggestions for link styling above?
 
:: Regards,
:: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 06:03, 31 May 2015 (EDT)
 
::: Sorry for the even later reply.
 
:::; Often used parameters and name suggestions
:::: I think that ''site'' and ''path'' parameters would be superfluous, also how about using ''file'' instead of ''repo''.  Instead of pointing to the whole of the repo usually will point to a specific file or directory within a repo.  As you say the ''commit'' parameter would only be used sparsely, though I think it might be good to have at times.
 
::::In essence I am suggesting {{obr}}'''flightgear file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''commit''{{cbr}}, {{obr}}'''simgear file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''commit''{{cbr}} and {{obr}}'''fgdata file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''commit''{{cbr}} for links to source files (and directories).  The ''path'' parameter would be what follow after <code>flightgear/src/</code>, <code>simgear/simgear/</code> or <code>fgdata/</code>.
 
:::; Defaulting
:::: Yep, it is definitively better to default than trow an error.
 
:::; Aircraft URL templates
:::: Good point about automatic downloading.  I did not think of that.  Better link to the info pages.
 
:::; Link styling
:::: Interesting problem.  I have considered both something resembling the path in a local file system or some abbreviated variant, like <code>flightgear/src/Time/TimeManager.cxx</code>, <code>simgear/simgear/magvar/coremag.cxx</code> and <code>fgdata/Nasal/view.nas</code>, or <code>flightgear/Time/TimeManager.cxx</code>, <code>simgear/magvar/coremag.cxx</code> and <code>fgdata/Nasal/view.nas</code>.  The advantage with having them look like a file path is to help those using Git to find the file in their local clone faster.  Then there is also the issues of whether only the ''path'' parameter should be used for the link to the file while there could be an explanatory link preceding it, for example like [[SimGear]]/[http://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/simgear/ci/next/tree/simgear/magvar/coremag.cxx magvar/coremag.cxx], and whether or not to use mostly lowercase the file path like label or the case used sometimes otherwise, in essence flightgear, fgdata and simgear, or FlightGear, FGData and SimGear.
 
:::: I am going to suggest abbreviated paths but camel case repo names, like [http://sourceforge.net/p/flightgear/simgear/ci/next/tree/simgear/magvar/coremag.cxx SimGear/magvar/coremag.cxx], though I am not convinced it is the best way.
 
::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:34, 10 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::: Personally, I would prefer all-lowercase, abbreviated links. Camel-case repo names doesn't look quite right in the context to me. However, I agree with everything else you've said. I think that having a central template ({{tl|repo link}}) is not required now. If ever the location of fgdata, FGAddon, etc. changes again, it still wouldn't be too hard to change the location in a handful of templates instead of one central template. Separate templates would also be much simpler than a central one and therefore easier to maintain.
 
:::: So, apart from link styling, I think we can start implementing these new templates:
::::* {{obr}}'''flightgear file'''{{cbr}}
::::* {{obr}}'''simgear file'''{{cbr}}
::::* {{obr}}'''fgdata file'''{{cbr}}
::::* {{obr}}'''fgaddon aircraft'''{{cbr}} (right name?)
 
:::: Regards,
 
:::: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 08:45, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::* Good point about lowercase vs. camel-case.  That was one of the things I was more hesitant about.
:::::* In retrospect I think {{obr}}'''fgaddon aircraft url'''{{cbr}} may be a better name, as it renders only an url. (Though it is an awfully long name, as well as the other aircraft repo URL templates.  I wonder if "aircraft" is needed?)
:::::* While the repo link template might not be needed (at least for official repos), a styling template will help keep the styling consistent and may help related maintenance.
:::::: How about something like {{obr}}'''source file'''{{!}}base-url={{!}}base-label={{!}}''commit=''{{!}}''commit-label=''{{!}}''path=''{{cbr}}? (I suggest named parameters in that one to aid maintenance.  It will rarely if ever be used in any other place that those three templates.)
:::::: It does not have to be there from the beginning and can be added at a later point (I guess that is the wiki equivalent of refactoring ;-) ).
::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 15:33, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
 
::::: Went ahead and added {{tl|flightgear file}}.
::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 16:51, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::: I noted that {{tl|readme file}} have a '''nopath=''' parameter stripping off the path in that template if empty.  A similar effect can be added to {{tl|flightgear file}} using the <code><nowiki>{{#tileparts: }}</nowiki></code> parser function without having to introduce a '''file''' parameter.  An elegant solution if needed.
:::::: An even more elegant way could be to use <code><nowiki>{{#tileparts: }}</nowiki></code> to only show the last ''n'' elements.
:::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:12, 11 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::::* I think {{obr}}'''fgaddon url'''{{cbr}} should be fine as it is about aircraft anyway. However, what if we want to link a certain file in the aircraft's directory, e.g., [[Scripted AI Objects#Aircraft]] (this would probably also go for an FGMEMBERS template)?
:::::::* A styling template would be a good idea in future. I have one query though: what would be the difference between '''base-url=''' and '''base-label=''', and between '''commit=''' and '''commit-label='''?
:::::::* '''nopath=''' is also a good idea.
::::::: Regards,
::::::: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 16:03, 13 September 2015 (EDT)
 
::::::::* What about doing something similar to the new templates, in essence {{obr}}'''fgaddon url'''{{!}}''aircraft''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''<s>commit</s>revision''{{cbr}}.  Of course for example FGUK's and Helijah's hangars will not handle '''path''' and '''commit''' as those are not repos.
::::::::: The aircraft repo/hangar templates will probably differ somewhat in implementation, but hopefully for a wiki editor they will be rather "orthogonal" (in the sense that they would be usable in a way consistent with similar templates).
::::::::: I guess for aircraft repos, as opposed to hangars, the template with only the '''aircraft''' parameter given should point to that aircraft directory or submodule.  It would also seem reasonable that a template with no parameters given should point to the repo or hangar top directory, info page or something similar.
::::::::* The way I recall having the '''base-url=''' thought up would be as the part of the URL preceding the path given in '''path='''.  Similarly '''base-label=''' would be the part of the label preceding the path.
::::::::: I am not really sure how (and why) I imagined that the commit reference would be different in URL and label.  That would probably not (ever) be needed and only confusing if used.
:::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 15:50, 15 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::::: I have noted that there is a need to be able to link to the tarballs.  I suggest adding a '''tarball=''' property that when not empty will link to the tarball download. (Also mentioned on Template talk:Fgaddon url).
:::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:01, 16 September 2015 (EDT)
 
::::::: {{tl|simgear file}} done. {{done}}
::::::: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 08:04, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
 
::::::: {{tl|fgdata file}} done. {{done}}
::::::: [[User:Red_Leader|<span style="color:red">'''''Red Leader'''''</span>]] ([[User_talk:Red_Leader|Talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red_Leader|contribs]]) 09:13, 14 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::::: Just remembered a somewhat useful tool when looking for external links to repos to replace with these templates: [[Special:LinkSearch]].  Its main drawback is a large one though:  It only look for domain names, not paths on a web site.  *sigh*  At least there is less than 2000 links to SourceForge, which by far have most links (though most of them developer mailing list posts).
:::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 16:35, 15 September 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::::: I have noted that the repository templates also may need a '''line=''' and probably also a '''label=''' parameter.  Many articles have links to particular line in a source file and some have links where even a '''nopath=1''' would currently take up too much space (in particular [[Canvas MapStructure Layers]]).
:::::::: In summary there seem to be a few things we have not thought of yet.
:::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 07:01, 16 September 2015 (EDT)
 
::::::::: I have noted that {{tl|flightgear file}},  {{tl|simgear file}} and {{tl|fgdata file}} all have gotten a '''line''' parameter now, which is needed.
 
::::::::: Though looking at [[Special:LinkSearch/http://sourceforge.net]] I see that links most often go to a path (duh!), then to a path and a line, and then to a path using a label (this I know from looking at a few articles, in particular [[Canvas MapStructure Layers]]), but not to a line.  Links to commit references currently only are used in the template examples.  Note that this is for ''all'' links to SourceForge, not just from these templates.
 
::::::::: From that I think it would be more user friendly (as in less typing) and still safe to change the parameter order from <code>{{obr}}'''x file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''reference''{{!}}''line''{{cbr}}</code> to either one of these:
:::::::::# <code>{{obr}}'''x file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''line''{{!}}''label''{{!}}''reference''{{cbr}}</code>
::::::::::: This would require having to add <code>{{!!}}</code> fur unused parameters once in a while.
:::::::::# <code>{{obr}}'''x file'''{{!}}''path''{{!}}''l=&lt;line&gt;''{{!}}''t=&lt;text&gt;''{{!}}''r=&lt;commit reference&gt;''{{cbr}}</code>.
::::::::::: For ease of template and possibly also article maintenance, but needing a little bit more typing (but no <code>{{!!}}</code> for unused unnamed parameters).
::::::::: I think I actually like the second one more.
 
::::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 14:48, 25 September 2015 (EDT)
 
: ''An article specific improvement suggestion was moved to [[Talk:FGAddon#Templates instead of explicit URLs]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Talk:FGAddon&oldid=88943#Templates_instead_of_explicit_URLs perm]).''
 
::::::::: I have added templates for linking to revision/commit summaries, {{tlx|fgaddon revision|revision |3=''t=''}}, {{tlx|fgdata commit|commit |3=''t=''}}, {{tlx|simgear commit|commit |3=''t=''}} and {{tlx|flightgear commit|commit |3=''t=''}}.
::::::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 01:37, 27 October 2015 (EDT)
 
== Shortcuts ==
I got tired of typing some of the longer names of pages in some of namespaces and looked into how shortcuts are done on Wikipedia (see {{Wikipedia|Wikipedia:Shortcut}}).  The implementation here  is of course a bit less complicated.&nbsp;;-)
 
For example you can now get to this page by typing only [[FGW:VP]] in the search box instead of [[FlightGear wiki:Village pump]].
 
For details on how this work see [[Help:Shortcuts]] and the {{tl|shortcut}} template.
 
—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 08:57, 3 October 2015 (EDT)
 
== Template translations ==
: '' Moved here from [[Help talk:Templates#Template localisation]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Help_talk:Templates&oldid=88122#Template_localisation perm]), as the part of the discussion begun refer to more than just that page.''
 
Awesome, the {{tl|WIP}} translation as seen on [[Fr/FGAddon]] works beautifully :)  I hope I don't break things!  Unfortunately I cannot edit and translate {{tl|Note}}.  It says: ''"You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reason:  This page has been protected from editing because it is included in the following page, which is protected with the "cascading" option turned on:  [[FlightGear Newsletter April 2015]]"''.  Is there a way to unlock it?  For French it doesn't need changing, but translations are needed for other languages.
[[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 08:25, 8 October 2015 (EDT)
 
: Hooray accidentally enabled "cascading" there, I've disabled it now, so please try again.
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 10:48, 8 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:: Cheers, that worked.  I have now translated {{tl|WIP}}, {{tl|note}}, {{tl|caution}}, {{tl|warning}}, and {{tl|BeingTranslated}} to be available in English, French, and German.  Not being a French or German native speaker, there is room for improvement here.
:: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 11:00, 8 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:: I've now also translated the {{tl|tip}} template into French and German.  Are there any more from the {{tl|tip}}, {{tl|note}}, {{tl|caution}}, {{tl|warning}}, {{tl|BeingTranslated}} series?  I'd like to add an example section in [[Help:Templates]] to help reveal the colourful existence of this useful set of related templates.
:: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 06:40, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:: Something like:
:: {{BeingTranslated}}
:: {{tip|If you do it this way, your life will be easier.}}
:: {{note|Do not forget to run this command.}}
:: {{caution|If you run this command incorrectly, your harddrive will be erased.}}
:: {{warning|Do not delete all FGAddon aircraft.}}
:: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 06:49, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::: There is a gallery with templates, [[Help:Gallery of messagebox templates]], showing examples of (hopefully) all the ''messagebox'' templates.  See also the [[Help talk:Gallery of messagebox templates#Splitting up the examples based on placement|note]] on its discussion page.  I guess the galleries can be advertised more. ;-)
::: Regarding the very varying style of all of them, I was at one time working on improving that, see [[User:Johan G/Messagebox style sandbox]], but I somehow got discouraged and/or distracted...
:::—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 11:54, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:::: I just made the galleries a tiny bit easier to find on the Help page (http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=Help:Templates&diff=88101&oldid=88044).  These galleries are prefect for creating translated galleries, to help with the translation process.  All new wiki contributors should be pointed to them.  Keep up the brilliant work with these things, they are really useful!
:::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 12:33, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::::: That is great.  Those "translated" galleries would indeed be perfect for that.
::::: When translating the templates though, could you add the '''lang=''' parameter to them as well, by adding <code><nowiki>| lang = {{{lang|}}}</nowiki></code> to the end of them (see {{tl|LangSwitch}}).  That way you could simply add for example <code><nowiki>| lang = {{{lang|</nowiki>'''fr'''<nowiki>}}}</nowiki></code> to the end of a template in order to review the French translation while working on it.  Just remember to remove the <code><nowiki>fr</nowiki></code> before saving though. ;-)
:::::—[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 14:33, 9 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::::: Sorry, that was a bit more complicated than needed.  To see the translation directly when previewing, adding for example <code><nowiki>| lang = fr</nowiki></code> to the LangSwitch template portion of the template you are translating would be enough.
::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 02:22, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
 
== Newsletter templates ==
: ''Moved here from [[User talk:Bugman#The collapsible script template]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Bugman&oldid=88780#The_collapsible_script_template perm]).''
 
maybe, we could come up with something similar to this to help clean up the newsletter template ? At some point, core developers were also contemplating to use newsletter contents as templates for some kind of FSWeekend/LinuxTag handout - I guess, a few templates could be used to mark relevant additions in each newsletter and automatically "nominate" those for inclusion in some kind of FSWeekend/LinuxTag handout? The same thing could then also be used for helping come up with a semi-automated ChangeLog/Release announcement, too.--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 06:52, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
 
: This sounds like two solutions:
 
: For re-usability, maybe each part of the newsletter can be placed into its own article such as [[FlightGear_Newsletter_October_2015/doc ALS dirt runway effect]], [[FlightGear_Newsletter_October_2015/doc PUI2Canvas]].  Then this can be transcluded into the newsletter, as well as into a document for ultimately creating the handout.  So this would be a fragmentation approach.  Here is an external example where I have used this to reuse documentation, and where it is transcluded into a template, itself to be used for transclusion:  [http://wiki.nmr-relax.com/Template:MessageBox/doc Template:MessageBox/doc].
 
: The second would be to turn the entire newsletter itself into a template.  Then people could just add values to parameters.  Here is a little mock up:
 
<pre>{{newsletter
| stage    = draft
| date    = October 2015
| date2    = 2015 10    <!-- for the newsletter category -->
| title1  = ALS dirt runway effect
| section1 = devel
| text1    =
The Atmospheric Light Scattering framework...
| title2  = PUI2Canvas: parsing PUI/XML using Nasal and Canvas
| section2 = devel
| text2    =
<gallery widths=350>
Scenarios-via-pui2canvas.xml.png...
}}
</pre>
 
: Then the newsletter can be constructed entirely using #if #switch and #tag magic words.  Or if combining with the fragmentation approach, the result is even more compact:
<pre>{{newsletter
| stage    = draft
| date    = October 2015
| date2    = 2015 10    <!-- for the newsletter category -->
| section1 = devel
| text1    = {{:FlightGear_Newsletter_October_2015/doc ALS dirt runway effect}}
| section2 = devel
| text2    = {{:FlightGear_Newsletter_October_2015/doc PUI2Canvas}}
}}
</pre>
 
: The only issue is that the result is that old newsletter might change or break as the template is updated (using a version numbering system in the template name itself would solve this).  I also suggest that you (Hooray) shift these last two comments somewhere more public, leaving links to the new location.
 
: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 09:35, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:: yes, that sounds good-we may want to provide some filtering options, i.e. for including/excluding certain contents, such as screen shots/youtube videos (which are typically not used on the website)-equally, youtube videos would not be relevant for creating a handout. That would also allow us to exclude certain "stubs" or standard paragraphs of the newsletter, i.e. "call for help", "translations wanted" etc. And we could also have a handful of broad categories (core development, aircraft, scenery etc) to serve as "channels", which would also allow us to transclude contents spanning more than a single newsletter cycle, or even spanning multiple release cycles (e.g. to create a time-line procedurally). But I guess some additional addons may be helpful to simplify creation/addition of contents, i.e. Johan once mentioned a JavaScript-solution for creating semi-dynamic forms to help with the creation of template-based articles (cannot find it atm). Right, I guess this should be moved to the village pump/wiki namespace - but we once did have a similar discussion already (also cannot find that one).--[[User:Hooray|Hooray]] ([[User talk:Hooray|talk]]) 11:24, 20 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::: I am not a huge fan of making things more complicated. :-\
 
::: I understand that you consider that it would be nice to be able to automate for example selecting parts of the newsletters for purposes like pamphlets and change logs.  However, I think there could be some problems with that.
 
::: It would be more work and require more maintenance even with templates that when clicked would start a new page or section with preloaded text.
 
::: My biggest issue is that there will be more obstacles to contributing to the newsletter and more cleanup/maintenance to be done.  This can already be noticed after the changes between the way the previous and current newsletter is compiled, which are much smaller than the ones suggested.  I believe that the further contributing to the newsletter get from contributing to a regular wiki article the more those issues will be more pronounced.  In addition there is the increased risk that a newsletter more dependent on templates could more easily break in the future.
 
::: I kind of feel that the approach are more akin to writing reusable program functions than writing texts for example using LaTeX macros.
 
::: This is not an attempt to veto the idea, more like an ''What and why are we trying to achieve, and is it worth the initial and following effort?''
 
::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 03:26, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:::: The <code>{{obr}}newsletter_vX.Y{{cbr}}</code> template concept does introduce a lot more fragility into the system.  Especially with a dedicated newsletter template and its interdependencies - the more ''programmable'' an article becomes, the easier it is to break.  Though an advantage is consistency (e.g. see [[Template:Informative_template]] and http://wiki.nmr-relax.com/Template:MessageBox).  Another slight advantage is that the newsletter source becomes simpler, so maybe that would make it less intimidating.  All of the scary header, and everything after the <nowiki>== Contributing ==</nowiki> section could be shifted out of the main article and into the template.  This would be an extension of the currently used <code>{{obr}}Newsletter-*{{cbr}}</code> templates - so it would just be shifting these out of sight of those who will be adding the newsletter content.  I'll make some quick mock up temporary articles based on the Oct. 2015 newsletter, so that a real comparison can be made.
 
:::: In any case if the goal is to share content, maybe a better approach would be to shift content out of a newsletter, after the fact and when it is needed, into its own <code><template_name>/doc <doc_name></code> article.  Then it can be transcluded back into the template and used in the handout.  If modifications are needed between the newsletter and handout, then copying and pasting and post-modifying would be more reliable then using template parameters passed into <code><template_name>/doc <doc_name></code> to modify its behaviour.
 
:::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 04:01, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::::: Just a quick KISS comment: Do really <code>doc_</code> contribute anything.  Would not for example <code>{{obr}}:FlightGear_Newsletter_October_2015/PUI2Canvas{{cbr}}</code> be descriptive enough already? ;-)
::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 04:16, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
 
::::: Oh, and if it is of any help, an (untested) example on how to preload text with a template can be found in [[FlightGear wiki:Village pump/Archive 2013#FlightGear Newsletter]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=FlightGear_wiki:Village_pump/Archive_2013&oldid=81712#FlightGear_Newsletter perm]).
::::: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 04:32, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
 
:::::: The <code>doc_</code> part was more a de-facto convention that I was aware of.  It contributes nothing.


:::::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 04:40, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
__TOC__


:::: Here are the temporary mock ups:  [[Mock_up_Newsletter_Oct_2015]] and [[Template:Newsletter_v0.1]].  To note - the simplicity of the newsletter source, the complexity of the template (to be expanded), and the newsletter template number versioning.  These are very quick rough tests as a demo, for example the TOC is not programmatically created yet, the [edit] links need to be returned using magic words, etc.  But it shows how this would look like in the end. Also note that this is for the templated newsletter idea, not for the fragmentation idea.
== MediaWiki updated to 1.39.6 ==


:::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 04:47, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
We have updated MediaWiki to its latest LTS version 1.39.6 today. Although we've tested the update, chances are that we've missed certain scenarios or features. Please report any issues that you may encounter.


:::: It should be possible to format the standard MediaWiki TOC simply by using a custom [[Template:Newsletter_v0.1.css]] file to automate this and have it looking similar to the current newsletter TOC.  For example see http://csswizardry.com/2010/02/mutiple-column-lists-using-one-ul/.  The styles for <code>.toc</code>, <code>.ul</code>, <code>.li</code>, <code>.toclevel-1</code>, <code>.toclevel-2</code>, etc. can then be defined.
[[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 09:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


:::: [[User:Bugman|Bugman]] ([[User talk:Bugman|talk]]) 07:39, 21 October 2015 (EDT)
== Embedded YouTube videos broken ==


== Removing a section from the Make nice screenshots howto ==
It seems that the [[mw:Extension:EmbedVideo|EmbedVideo extension]] was removed at some point. Consequently, pages such as [[Howto:Creating FlightGear Promo Videos]] are broken. At present, the best replacements seems to be [[mw:Extension:EmbedVideo_(fork)|a fork]] and [[mw:Extension:YouTube|Extension:YouTube]].
: ''Moved here from [[User talk:Johan G#Removing a section from Make nice screenshots page]] ([http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php?title=User_talk:Johan_G&oldid=89117#Removing_a_section_from_Make_nice_screenshots_page perm]).''


Hi Johan, what do you think about removing altogether the following section of the [[Howto:Make_nice_screenshots#Colors_and_whitebalance|Make nice screenshots]] page: http://wiki.flightgear.org/Howto:Make_nice_screenshots#Colors_and_whitebalance
—'''''[[User:Red Leader|<span style="color:red">Red Leader</span>]]''''' ([[User talk:Red Leader|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red Leader|contribs]]) 19:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
IMO, it is a very bad idea to urge users to enhance their screenshots with GIMP or Photoshop in order to "improve" them, as this will result in screenshots that do not reflect what can be achieved in FG. I don't think screenshots are by any standard the same thing as photography, and the only result of these tweaked screenshots will be false advertisement from our part. Nothing against users doing it by themselves if they want to, but "officially" supporting it is a bad idea to me. I also would be careful not to use altered screenshots in our articles the most we can for the same reasons above.
See the discussion in our forum starting with this post: http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=27674&p=262281#p262271


Cheers, [[User_talk:Gsagostinho|Gsagostinho]]
: Hi,
: Thanks for the report. It was introduced by today's update, but should be fixed now.
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 21:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)


: While I to a large extent agree with you, in particular with the sentiment that edited screenshots does not portray FlightGear in an honest way, I think it would be a good idea (in the longer term at least) to take it on the [[FGW:VP|village pump]] rather than here.
:: Confirmed, thanks. And I’d completely forgotten about {{[[Template:Wikipedia|wikipedia]]}}. 😅
: Would it be ok to move this topic from here to the village pump?
:: '''''[[User:Red Leader|<span style="color:red">Red Leader</span>]]''''' ([[User talk:Red Leader|talk]], [[Special:Contributions/Red Leader|contribs]]) 21:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 16:59, 31 October 2015 (EDT)


: Maybe I should add that I do understand that some want to take artistic freedoms and that there should be a place for that as well.  But the problem of course is, how will someone not familiar to FlightGear know the difference?  Preferably without water marks or the like.
== Forum registration problem ==
: —[[User:Johan G|Johan G]] ([[User_talk:Johan_G|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Johan_G|contribs]]) 17:05, 31 October 2015 (EDT)


:: It's absolutely okay to move this to village pump. As for the artistic freedoms, I don't think the wiki or the offical website are the place for that, else we will be the single piece of software displaying bogus screenshots on their official channels. My point is: people have all the liberty to do whatever they want, but an official endorsement is another story. That wiki page I linked is basically asking for users to "improve" their images, and if everyone followed it there wouldn't be a single honest screenshot all around. I really believe we need a guideline for this, at least concerning the wiki and official website.
Hello,
::Cheers, [[User_talk:Gsagostinho|Gsagostinho]]
I would like to register on the forum, but I tried several times without success. I sent an email to the administrator some time ago, but it seems to have been lost. I don't know what to do, is there somebody here who could help? Please tell me if you need additional information.
Thanks very much in advance. [[User:Kestrel|Kestrel]] ([[User talk:Kestrel|talk]]) 13:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)


::: By the way, I exchanged those screenshots from that page for better ones as the graphics of FG improved a whole lot since they were created, and the whole point of the page is to talk about nice screenshots anyway :) I also fixed some typos.
: Hi,
::: —[[User_talk:Gsagostinho|Gsagostinho]]
: That's unfortunate! You can find my email address at https://forum.flightgear.org/contact.php Please try again if you've done that before, I'll actively monitor the address for any incoming messages, and let me know if you don't get a reply.
: [[User:Gijs|Gijs]] ([[User talk:Gijs|talk]]) 15:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC) (forum admin)

Latest revision as of 15:01, 25 March 2024


Archives
2012, 2013
2014, 2015
2016, 2017
2018, 2019
2020, 2021
2022

Shortcut
FGW:VP

Welcome to the Village Pump. This page is used to discuss the technical issues, operations and guidelines of the FlightGear wiki.

Please add new topics to the bottom of this page.

Old discussions should be moved to a FlightGear wiki:Village pump/Archive YEAR. These discussions can then be moved to a relevant talk page if appropriate.

MediaWiki updated to 1.39.6

We have updated MediaWiki to its latest LTS version 1.39.6 today. Although we've tested the update, chances are that we've missed certain scenarios or features. Please report any issues that you may encounter.

Gijs (talk) 09:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Embedded YouTube videos broken

It seems that the EmbedVideo extension was removed at some point. Consequently, pages such as Howto:Creating FlightGear Promo Videos are broken. At present, the best replacements seems to be a fork and Extension:YouTube.

—Red Leader (talk, contribs) 19:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi,
Thanks for the report. It was introduced by today's update, but should be fixed now.
Gijs (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Confirmed, thanks. And I’d completely forgotten about {{wikipedia}}. 😅
Red Leader (talk, contribs) 21:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Forum registration problem

Hello, I would like to register on the forum, but I tried several times without success. I sent an email to the administrator some time ago, but it seems to have been lost. I don't know what to do, is there somebody here who could help? Please tell me if you need additional information. Thanks very much in advance. Kestrel (talk) 13:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi,
That's unfortunate! You can find my email address at https://forum.flightgear.org/contact.php Please try again if you've done that before, I'll actively monitor the address for any incoming messages, and let me know if you don't get a reply.
Gijs (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2024 (UTC) (forum admin)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.flightgear.org/w/index.php?title=FlightGear_wiki:Village_pump&oldid=139564"