General Question Open Source Orbiter, other releases, addons

[misha.physics]

Hi,
I would like to clarify several questions about current Orbiter releases and development to create some actual Orbiter state understanding in my (and maybe not only my) head. Please, correct me.

1. The latest stable (official) Orbiter release for today is Orbiter 2016 (v.160828):
a) its D3D9 Client version is R4.26 (https://www.orbiter-forum.com/resources/d3d9-for-orbiter-2016.5493). Is it possible to find out (or read somewhere) its difference from the R4.25 one?
b) the latest sound addon versions for Orbiter 2016 are OrbiterSound 5.0 and XRSound 2.0.
c) also, for example, NASSP 8.0 (https://github.com/orbiternassp/NASSP/releases) is designed (compatible) for Orbiter 2016, not for Orbiter Beta, isn't it?

2. The latest Orbiter Beta version is r90 (https://www.orbiter-forum.com/resources/orbiter-beta-r90.954/) and it doesn't (and won't) develop anymore, since its further development is actually Open Source Orbiter (https://github.com/orbitersim/orbiter), isn't it? Does this mean, that there's not any reasons to use Orbiter Beta (of the latest version r90), because it has been replaced by Open Source Orbiter? However, it seems I'm wrong, since the new D3D9 30.7 version (https://www.orbiter-forum.com/resources/d3d9-for-orbiter-beta.5495/) for Orbiter Beta was published (for the Orbiter Beta r90, as I assume). So, is there any point (and what) in using Orbiter Beta today, when we have Open Source Orbiter?

3. Open Source Orbiter (https://github.com/orbitersim/orbiter). The latest compiled build for "end users" can be download from (https://github.com/orbitersim/orbiter/releases/tag/latest), both x64 and x86. Only users with access can make changes to this development branch on github, isn't it?

4) As I understand, there are a lot of Orbiter forks (other developments), and this — Open Orbiter (https://github.com/OpenOrbiterSim/openorbiter) is one of them. Also, only users with access can make changes to this. And here's no compiled builds for "end users", isn't it? What's the relationship between Open Source Orbiter and Open Orbiter? Are they developing independently?

______________________

I'd like to try Open Source Orbiter. I downloaded x64 build, and I have Orbiter 2016 installation with high-resolution textures. Could you help me to "setting" the PlanetTexDir? As I understand, I need to configure the Orbiter_NG.cfg file in main Open Source Orbiter directory. I found this, but not sure I can do it correctly. My Orbiter 2016 installation folder path is:
C:\Users\xolms\Downloads\Orbiter

 

[Face]

3. Open Source Orbiter (https://github.com/orbitersim/orbiter). The latest compiled build for "end users" can be download from (https://github.com/orbitersim/orbiter/releases/tag/latest), both x64 and x86. Only users with access can make changes to this development branch on github, isn't it?

4) As I understand, there are a lot of Orbiter forks (other developments), and this — Open Orbiter (https://github.com/OpenOrbiterSim/openorbiter) is one of them. Also, only users with access can make changes to this. And here's no compiled builds for "end users", isn't it? What's the relationship between Open Source Orbiter and Open Orbiter? Are they developing independently?

I think it is important to understand that with open source development - and especially in the "bazaar" style (in contrast to the "cathedral" style) favored by DVCS systems like git - there is no "latest" version. The best you can get is a blessed repository, where everybody agrees that this is the "official" one. For Orbiter, this seems to be the repository of Martin Schweiger, which is the orbitersim one on Github. Also on platforms like Github, you usually have a pull-request collaboration mode, meaning that a repo only has very few people that have actual push access to it, and additions are normally developed in individual forks, eventually to be pulled by the "upstream" repo maintainers. I.e. all the forks of orbitersim are development repositories where work is done, and only if Martin - or the few maintainer of the orbitersim repo - decides to pull something from development forks into orbitersim, it becomes an "official" change.

So yes, only the repo owners (or the few people that got rights from the owner) can make changes to the repo.

AFAIK, OpenOrbiterSim is a fork that was done by the O-F staff in order to create a better development platform on Github, because to adjust the various knobs on Github, more permissions than simple push access would have been necessary in the orbitersim repo, but Martin had too little time on his hands. IIRC, the idea was to focus development work there, maintained by the O-F staff, with the orbitersim repo functioning as a kind of public facade where finished work eventually lands, but without all the devops bells and whistles.

 

[Max-Q]

c) also, for example, NASSP 8.0 (https://github.com/orbiternassp/NASSP/releases) is designed (compatible) for Orbiter 2016, not for Orbiter Beta, isn't it?

NASSP works correctly only in Orbiter Beta r90. AFIK, this is one of the only reasons Beta r90 and it's D3D9 client is widely available.

 

[Ripley]

...
I'd like to try Open Source Orbiter. I downloaded x64 build, and I have Orbiter 2016 installation with high-resolution textures. Could you help me to "setting" the PlanetTexDir? As I understand, I need to configure the Orbiter_NG.cfg file in main Open Source Orbiter directory. I found this, but not sure I can do it correctly. My Orbiter 2016 installation folder path is:
C:\Users\xolms\Downloads\Orbiter

Edit the Orbiter_NG.cfg file and modify the EchoAllParams parameter from FALSE to TRUE, like this
EchoAllParams = TRUE

Save it and close it
Launch Orbiter, just at the launchpad, and exit it (no need to run a scenario)

Reopen the Orbiter_NG.cfg file and add your texture line:
PlanetTexDir = C:\Users\xolms\Downloads\Orbiter\Textures\

Save it, close it, enjoy.

 

[misha.physics]

Thanks, it's clearer now.

NASSP works correctly only in Orbiter Beta r90. AFIK, this is one of the only reasons Beta r90 and it's D3D9 client is widely available.

So, "Beta" in the title "NASSP-V8.0-Beta-Orbiter2016-1985" refers to Orbiter version, not NASSP, namely NASSP 8 is not a beta version of NASSP, am I right? (I've additionally installed Orbiter Beta.)

PlanetTexDir = C:\Users\xolms\Downloads\Orbiter\Textures\

It's working. It must be done only for the PlanetTexDir, not for ConfigDir, MeshDir, TextureDir and so on, isn't it?

So, the minimum set for Open Source Orbiter using today can be the latest github build and the PlanetTexDir command, which uses standart Orbiter 2016 textures including high-resolution ones. Does it correctly? What other important addons can you reccommend for this (graphics, crafts...)? I'm currently using only D3D9 MicroTexture Pack 1.0 and an improved runway texture ("Runway2.dds").

 

[Max-Q]

So, "Beta" in the title "NASSP-V8.0-Beta-Orbiter2016-1985" refers to Orbiter version, not NASSP, namely NASSP 8 is not a beta version of NASSP, am I right? (I've additionally installed Orbiter Beta.)

NASSP 8 is still in Beta. So it is a beta version of NASSP installed in Orbiter Beta r90.
That said, it sure doesn't seem like it's beta when flying NASSP.

 

[n72.75]

Yeah, NASSP 8 is still a "beta" release, mostly because we're waiting for an official stable release of Orbiter...and we really like adding new features that need a lot of testing.

 

[Max-Q]

and we really like adding new features that need a lot of testing.

That's what makes it such a great sim...