20,741
edits
Release plan: Difference between revisions
m
→2.10
m (→2.10) |
m (→2.10) |
||
| Line 195: | Line 195: | ||
* New/updated Nasal scripts contributed to the base package should be checked to properly support important features like simulator reset, this also applies to Nasal scripts used by aircraft [https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=956] | * New/updated Nasal scripts contributed to the base package should be checked to properly support important features like simulator reset, this also applies to Nasal scripts used by aircraft [https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=956] | ||
* there were a number of navcache/SQLite related issues reported via the issue tracker and the forum/devel list [https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=894] | * there were a number of navcache/SQLite related issues reported via the issue tracker and the forum/devel list [https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bugs/issues/detail?id=894] | ||
* a little irritation/frustration was caused due to the conflicting review statements concerning the new radio propagation code [http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg38905.html] [http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg38825.html] [http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg33692.html] - some of this boiled down to coding style related issues, highlighting the fact that different core developers have different "coding styles" and requirements when reviewing merge requests, because we still lack an official "FlightGear coding style guide" [http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg38958.html] | |||
==== 2.8 ==== | ==== 2.8 ==== | ||