Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 15:13:50 +0200 (CEST) From: "Ganael LAPLANCHE" <ganael.laplanche@martymac.org> To: glarkin@FreeBSD.org,Ganael LAPLANCHE <ganael.laplanche@martymac.org> Cc: Anton Shterenlikht <mexas@bristol.ac.uk>, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org, Chris Rees <utisoft@gmail.com> Subject: Re: About games/flightgear-aircrafts Message-ID: <20110922125922.M59578@martymac.org> In-Reply-To: <4E7B2FA8.4050403@FreeBSD.org> References: <20110922071857.M71817@martymac.org> <CADLo83_Tg89c7EqX4AxSNAUCT3tQ%2BMxJp%2BSNg2jGx_1uEfaKdA@mail.gmail.com> <20110922090740.GA17805@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <20110922092016.M80451@martymac.org> <4E7B2FA8.4050403@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 22 Sep 2011 08:52:56 -0400, Greg Larkin wrote Hi Greg, > [...] > If you can break the flightgear airplanes (or subsets of > airplanes) into a number of add-on ports, that would be one > way to avoid the huge download problem, as well as an > excessive number of OPTIONS in the base port. Of course, the > add-on port idea assumes that airplanes can be downloaded > individually in some fashion. Thanks for this explanation. I had thought about that option too, but the same questions as my first solution remain : what should be the list of the available ports ? I really have no idea here : any craft may be interesting to players. Also, if this list could be established, why not keep a single port (which would then be *a lot* easier to maintain) ? To sum um, in my opinion, there are in really 2 options : 1) Limit the port to a few selected aircrafts => (either in one port or split) 2) Remove the port I can go for 1), but I would need help to establish the list of aircrafts you'd like... :p Best regards, -- Ganael LAPLANCHE <ganael.laplanche@martymac.org> http://www.martymac.org | http://contribs.martymac.org FreeBSD: martymac <martymac@FreeBSD.org>, http://www.FreeBSD.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20110922125922.M59578>