Talk:FGPanel

Use of Affected-by-Canvas (10/2012)

hi,

Just to let you know: I am not going to get involved in an editing fight on the wiki, and I am obviously not going to revert edits that you have done to your own articles and/or projects. In fact, article "ownership" is something that I also asked Martin to respect, to no avail so far unfortunately...

I fully realize what Martin is trying to do here, and I'm prepared to see even more resistance and FUD being spread by him. I find it very unfortunate that you are directly embarking on this train now...

That said, the "affected by canvas" template was added to the fgpanel page for a reason, and I am not sure if you are aware of it:

I do understand that you have lately been very busy and probably not that actively involed in the project or the various discussions during the last months according to the devel list archives and the fg/sg commit history, but there are several developers currently working on porting your original "fgpanel" to use the new canvas system instead, which is something that has been discussed on both, the forum and the devel mailing list.

I'm not just referring to "outside" people, but also core developers with commit access, such as TheTom and Zakalawe. The general idea was discussed in May 2012: http://www.mail-archive.com/flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net/msg37441.html

In fact, you yourself, have previously participated in these discussions: https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=101044#p101044

In addition, Zakalawe mentioned that he's going to unify the 2D rendering backend to prepare FG for wider adoption of OSG, this includes porting the 2D panel system to make use of the canvas system - another thing that Zakalawe is working on: https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?p=166896#p166896

The major showstopper here is the fact that many FG subsystems would not be required to run in such as "standalone" mode and would need to be made optional, i.e. runtime-configurable - another thing that is currently being worked: https://gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/commit/8608a480736651999c5ea31a489343ee097ee915

In contrast, the "fgpanel" part of FG has not been actively developed/maintained lately and is obviously going to be depreciated by these efforts: https://gitorious.org/fg/flightgear/trees/next/utils/fgpanel

Now, maybe you can see that I have not just been adding uninformed statements to the wiki, but that there's actually real development going on, not just backed up by "discussions" or "RFCs", but by actual code and git commits ?

I am writing all this to you, because I hope that you understand the technical side of things, and because I think that you were just unaware of the latest developments.

Now, it's fair enough to say that you don't consider your fgpanel project depreciated by the canvas system because it "just works", but obviously that wouldn't match the ongoing discussions and developments - including things that you have said yourself here.

Frankly, all this is once again a huge disappointment and shows that the FlightGear project is primarily limited by intersocial issues and not so much by technical restrictions.

--Hooray 04:29, 9 October 2012 (EDT)