chris wrote: ElChristou wrote:
selden wrote:I think perhaps you are reading too much into what ChrisL wrote. We're talking about Addons here. It's up to the Addon's author to provide those files. If they're not provided, they can't be cumbersome. I also interpreted what ChrisL wrote to mean that Celestia should be able to display to the user what scripts, html and other auxiliary files came with the Addon, and that Celestia should be able to execute the scripts or display the html (or Readme or PDF or other) files without forcing the user to iconize or otherwise get out of Celestia: Celestia would spawn a copy of an appropriate viewer. As a corollary, scripts should be in a directory associated with their Addon, they shouldn't be put in Celestia's own scripts directory.
yes sorry I misread this part and focused on "ChrisL: The same facilities could be used for the standard Celestia package."
So I was seeing some official content to let users discover some basis and possibilities...
You didn't misread: I do think that the standard content should be supplemented with scripts, bookmarks, and other information that will guide exploration. But, I don't think that this needs to get in the way of anyone--professional or otherwise--who is using Celestia. Hide a window and the information is gone until you reactivate it via the menu or some other means.
As far as I can tell, there is already a working counter example in existence, where you are actively involved and paid for
++++++++++++++++http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/jf1w07/STA/http://sta.estec.esa.int/Space_Trajecto ... /Home.html
Here is the SVN reference:http://sta.wiki.sourceforge.net/STA+BINARIESLEGAL
STA code is open source. The code in the STA project is license under the GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE, Version 2, June 1991 of the Free Software Foundation, commonly known as GNU GPL.
...In the STA project, all Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) are assigned to ESA.STA Partners and Team:
Universities and entities partnering with ESA to date are as follows:
* Technical University of Delft (Netherlands)
* University of Bremen (Germany)
* ZARM institude of Technology (Germany)
* University of Coimbra (Portugal)
* Complutense University (Spain)
* University of Birmingham (United Kingdom)
* Instituto Superior Technico de Lisboa (Portugal)
* University of Southampton (United Kingdom)
* Politechnico di Milano (Italy)
* Celestia team
The structure in SVN is like this (as you know very well of course):celestia-src/
302 5 days cjlaurel Fixes for building with QtCreator on Mac OS X.
doc/ 300 4 weeks cjlaurel Copied qt4 branch to trunk.
iconary/ 300 4 weeks cjlaurel Copied qt4 branch to trunk.
macosx/ 300 4 weeks cjlaurel Copied qt4 branch to trunk.
sta-data/ 300 4 weeks cjlaurel Copied qt4 branch to trunk.
sta-src/ 304 3 hours cjlaurel Moved qmake/QtCreator project file from sta-src to trunk.
windows/ 300 4 weeks cjlaurel Copied qt4 branch to trunk.
STA.pro 304 3 hours cjlaurel Moved qmake/QtCreator project file from sta-src to trunk.
The structure is very much how I consider further possible specialized setups:
1) Various additional code modules like a Plotter module, a Network module various dedicated calculation modules AND a code interface to Celestia proper (residing in the celestia-src directory)
2) sta-data contains largely Celestia's data.
So...why did you just argue that additional code for modularizations on the professional level is unnecessary? I don't quite understand.