What really needs to be implemented in 1.4.0 final?

[Guckytos]

I just took a look at Hanks wikibook with all the wanted or hoped for features of coming Celestia releases.
Since it is becoming bigger and bigger I thought that it would be a good idea to think about what the coming 1.4.0 version should really incorporate.
IMHO the new version is nearly done, with all the fantastic work from Fridger and Toti. The new features are really enough to make a version jump. Well, I don't know what they are still planing to incorporate, but once that is done, i think 1.4.0 is ready to be officially released.
What do you think?

But there are a few things in the wikibook list, that I think would also benefit this version.
So i am making a poll, just to get a feel what people think.

And if you don't see a poll option for Fridger and Totis work, that is because I think without that there is no new version

Okay since I don't really know how to do it better i made 6 Options, with the descriptions of the options here:

Option 1: Keys
Change Time Flow Rate While Paused
Zoom to Fill

Option 2: Orbits
Multiple Star Orbit Display
Show Stars and Planets around Barycenters

Option 3: Labels
Star Label Density Control
Catalog Preference for Star Labels

Option 4: Reload
Reload Data Without Restart

Option 5: SSC
Local InfoUrls
Multiple Names in the SSC

[hank]

I just took a look at Hanks wikibook with all the wanted or hoped for features of coming Celestia releases.
Since it is becoming bigger and bigger I thought that it would be a good idea to think about what the coming 1.4.0 version should really incorporate.
IMHO the new version is nearly done, with all the fantastic work from Fridger and Toti. The new features are really enough to make a version jump. Well, I don't know what they are still planing to incorporate, but once that is done, i think 1.4.0 is ready to be officially released.
What do you think?

But there are a few things in the wikibook list, that I think would also benefit this version.
So i am making a poll, just to get a feel what people think.

The feature list in the wikibook was intended to provide long-term direction. It wasn't really intended to affect the immediate next version. Personally, I don't think any new features should be considered that would delay the release. If we could get the critical bugs out of the new galaxy and multiple star system code, that would be enough. Otherwise, I doubt there's any chance that we could get a new version released by the end of the year. And that's what I think the goal should be.

That said, it's not too early to begin thinking about what should go into the following release. Hopefully it won't be so long delayed. But I don't think the wikibook suggested feature list is complete enough yet to start sorting out what should come next. Also, many of the items on the list are not sufficiently well specified to begin implementation. We'll need to have more detailed specifications before they're ready for consensus prioritization or implementation planning.

I would suggest that people begin by reviewing the list and adding the new features they'd like to see that aren't there yet. They should also if possible provide more specifics for the ones that are already there but lack details. I think this is where we have to start.

Just to be clear, it's not "my" wikibook. The wikibook belongs to the Celestia Community, and eveyone is needed to contribute.

- Hank

[Don. Edwards]

Well what I want isn't even on the list, I want the long awaited cloud shadows and cloud bumpmaping. Chris said it was possible but that was well over a year and a half ago. So I am not holding my breath for any real new features anymore. I will keep my other opinions about Celestia'a future to myself. But i am not happy with the way things are thats for sure.

Don. Edwards

[hank]

Well what I want isn't even on the list, I want the long awaited cloud shadows and cloud bumpmaping.

Don,

I encourage you to go add your desired features to the list at the wikibook.

- Hank

[medusa]

I voted for star orbit features - had part in a discussion with Chris last year, and I like multiple stars systems and to play around with it.
Nevertheless I also like a reload button - it really would help in fineadjust of meteoroide trajectories for further versions of the Impactors addon.

~Diane.

[Guckytos]

So i am back and now even with an avatar.

@Hank, sorry to have it called your wikibook, but since you mentioned the idea with that page .... (I also already contributed to it, btw)
I understand that most of the ideas are for future releases, that is why i only picked certain features for the poll.

Anyways, why i put this poll up is to show the developers, that have spare time what the people would like most in the coming release, so that they can eventually try to incorporate it.
It doesn't mean they have to do it, of course. It is only a pointer in which direction attention could be focussed.

Personally i voted for the orbits features, since this would nicely fit into the new features of multiple stars. And i have to say that i miss it sometimes, when i go to binary stars.
The other thing that i want most is the reload function, but since i now have a version with it, that is on tha backburner for the official version IMO.

Regards,

Guckytos

[scalbers]

Hank's wikibook is pretty handy. I just added an entry #11 about rendering of textures with improved illumination phase functions.

[Malenfant]

Hank's wikibook is pretty handy. I just added an entry #11 about rendering of textures with improved illumination phase functions.

IMO this is essential - it really should be the #1 priority since the goal of Celestia is to be realistic. The problem is that the Lambert function is not realistic at all for rendering planets - if you look at the real moon it does not dim as you approach the limb from the centre of the disk, it's the same illumination throughout the lit side. However in Celestia this does not happen. I'm not even sure it's particularly good for gas giants either.

At the very least we need a Lommel-Seeliger function for lunar-like surfaces, or ideally a Buratti type function that mixes both LS and Lambert. Rayleigh Scattering would also be great for atmospheres.

Opposition surges would be nice but I don't think those are easily modelled.

EDIT: Bjorn Jonsson has done a lot of work on this, I think he used to post here. But check out some of the things on his Experimental Renderings page at http://www.mmedia.is/~bjj/3dtest/ - particularly the Europa renders using different photometric functions at the bottom of the page.

[rthorvald]

I want all of the above... But not now. Let??s see Fridgers and Toti??s work finalized and incorporated to the main version, and get an official 1.4 release from that. The rest can come later...

-rthorvald