Aircraft rating system: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Aircraft rating system (view source)

Revision as of 21:33, 29 May 2014

943 bytes removed ,  29 May 2014
cleanup
(added considerations and suggestion for a deadline from the forum)
(cleanup)
Line 15: Line 15:
#If a maintainer can not be located or the aircraft is known to be abandoned do the rating and ask for the change to be merged into the base package.
#If a maintainer can not be located or the aircraft is known to be abandoned do the rating and ask for the change to be merged into the base package.


See [[Suggestions for a wider adoption of ratings|below]] for some considerations on this rating procedure.
See [[#Considerations on the rating procedure|below]] for some considerations on this rating procedure.


== Rating criteria ==
== Rating criteria ==
Line 97: Line 97:
You can find the current wiki aircraft pages within each status level via the [[:Category:Aircraft by status|aircraft status category]] page.
You can find the current wiki aircraft pages within each status level via the [[:Category:Aircraft by status|aircraft status category]] page.


== Considerations on this rating system ==
== Considerations on the rating procedure ==
Is it right that aircraft are only rated by their respective developers? Many lack a rating, and in many cases the maintainer is absent or just doesn't care. If, as originally, the rating is intended open to everyone, should unrated aircraft be rated by users? It would be reasonable for alpha development versions (they're easy to rate), but could lead to wrong ratings for the more developed ones. Yet this might incentivize their maintainers (hardly a well developed project is not maintained) to fix those, so far, unused ratings.
Is it right that aircraft are only rated by their respective developers? Many lack a rating, and in many cases the maintainer is absent or just doesn't care. If, as originally, the rating is intended open to everyone, should unrated aircraft be rated by users? It would be reasonable for alpha development versions (they're easy to rate), but could lead to wrong ratings for the more developed ones. Yet this might incentivize their maintainers (hardly a well developed project is not maintained) to fix those, so far, unused ratings. Some insights on this were examined in the forum thread on this topic: see [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12193&p=211086#p211086 this forum post].
 
In this terms, it's been proposed the adoption of a deadline, in two possible ways (see [http://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=12193&p=211086#p211086 this forum post]):
#At some point we simply no longer display any info about unrated aircraft on the download page. If the authors want their aircraft on the download page they will either do the rating or ask someone to do it. This does two things for us:
##It forces aircraft to be rated if the author wants it on the download page.
##Gives aircraft devs a simple why to keep aircraft that are still in too early of a development state off the download page by either not having a rating section or by commenting it out. The current aircraft inventory has many aircraft that are not ready for even basic testing by users that should not be on the download page at all and I think many aircraft devs would take advantage of this.
#The other way to deal with the dead line thing is to set all of the ratings for unrated aircraft to 0 when the dead line is reached and if the authors don't like it they can update the ratings for their aircraft.


== Related content ==
== Related content ==
Bigstones
573

edits

Retrieved from "https://wiki.flightgear.org/Special:MobileDiff/72016"

Navigation menu