I would think the fgrun developers would also find it beneficial if the whole issue became a coordinated effort, rather than multiple different projects. I agree that it can probably be considered to be annoying to switch the GUI toolkit, however there would be new chances, too. Thanks for your fast feedback, what exactly were the main issues in porting fgrun to MacOS X-was it only related to the look-and-feel or were there any technical issues?Īnd what exactly was fruitless? Were there any actual efforts? Try to combine your efforts and everybody will benefit from it.

It's really not the time to add yet another half baked utility to the FlightGear tool suite. In particular with the fgrun team, simply because it is the most advanced one and has been around for quite a while. In my opinion it would be really worth to discuss this particular issue with the developers of the other launcher utilities. I really appreciate all the work you and others are putting into FlightGear, however I find it pretty unfortunate and terribly inefficient to see multiple people trying to fix the same problems with different projects, literally re-inventing the wheel. If fgrun is not an option because of it's dependency to FLTK, it might be wise to simply contact the maintainer and have a constructive talk about converting fgrun to a GUI toolkit that's also available on the Mac (i.e. It's really kind of unfortunate to have different projects working on the same stuff, while all of these projects could (and SHOULD) combine their efforts.

Well, why exactly can't Mac users simply use fgrun ( ), it looks there are now at least 3 different FlightGear launcher utilities: fgrun (FlightGear Launcher), FGTools(FlightGear Tools) and your starter.

Flight gear mac