Voluntarily retired from Curt's forum

[SHM]

The people there now, haven't understood them except bomber (You have full my full respect )

[KL-666]

Well, that is a real pity. A civil conversation was starting up (even Thorsten was civil, chapeau!) and then Curt has to barge in kindling the flame of trench war again. Does it ever end?

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=29509&sid=076d55e48dba085deaf21a00e09e34a6&start=45#p284975

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

https://forum.flightgear.org/viewtopic. ... 45#p284983

I'm not really sure what's going on here - I created the code to generate the cs_ layer for the USA, Martin tweaked and ran the code on a server to generate the cs_ layers, the cs_ layers were available but were never part of the main project and there's no GPL requirement to continue to make that data available as a result, notwithstanding the fact data is different than source code.

This is not what I am seeing on Hawaii, nor on St. Marteen. Where the Terrasync scenery seem to have been built with some landclass different to v0. Where are those sources?[**] Aren't those the missing cs?

I'm planning on releasing beta Australia scenery very soon, looks like I'm going to have to release it under a more restrictive copyright, which gives me no pleasure.

Yes. Please do. Do use a license you can honor without flinching[***].

__________________________________Footnotes
[**] Not a rethoric question. I am asking to have access to the correct landclasses. I need them since I am rebuilding some parts of the world to patch terraGIT for troubled scenery, which is strongly based on terrasync content. The landclasses are source of the binary distributed in terrasync, and I am calling the usage of the GPL to request for the access to these sources.

[***] Speaking of licenses, I noticed the devel list was discussing the option of releasing aircrafts heavily operating in nonGPL libraries, so to speak, frankly as a mean to close the source of some aircrafts in FG? Where is this project going to stop the seek for methodology of closing the source?. In any case I am happy the group did settle for not supporting such set of ideas.

[KL-666]

The demand for the sources is rightful, since they still use it in their scenery. But give them a couple of days to recover if they had an accident.

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

Oh totally. I am not saying NOW.
It saddens me that they have this attitude that I am being unreasonable to ask for the sources. And saying that all terrasync only uses v0/
Well, maybe. I don't know. But using v0 alone I get the same output in most of the world, but with some exceptions (where I can't but believe they used custom landclasses). Currently, Specifically, St. Marteen and Hawai'i.

[SHM]

TNCM (v0)


terrasync (cs)


As you can see definitely the landclass data was edited from v0

[jwocky]

So? Then pull the scenery equipment of an IAR-80 on them!

[KL-666]

As i see that discussion going on at that other forum, i get the feeling that it is a bit of a shabby organization that does not know how to make backups. Still, give them a couple of days.

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

It's not about backups.

It's about an organization that has the tendency to centralization of content. Only a few/selected few have access to the material.

Like per example, Terrasync. If terrasync were to fail, or a situation happens, then no 2nd repository to restore from exits. SVN IS CENTRALIZED. Same for FGADDon.

In the case of the mapserver, they first claim hardware issue, then someone (Hooray) mentioned that a previous collaborator is unwilling to share the sources. God Knows what's true when Hooray speaks.
But again, the landclasses (AKA mapserver) where centralized as in no-one else having a copy of the full data-set repository (apparently).

You don't need backups when you are distributed (think git). If you need to, any collaborators' clone is a full copy of the complete content.
That's reason number 3 I alleged when I suggested the cores to drop FGADDon for FGMEMBERS. I told them, it is centralized ! (yikeS!). And they took an attitude that meant: we are not interested in distributed (in the form of: we dont want to encourage people forking away)

So again, I don't see this as a problem of backups. But a problem of a proper distribution of content.
FGMEMBERS and FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT partly solve that problem.

At least V0 is already distributed in FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT, and people could fork/clone/and develop on GPL license terms.

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-TERRAGIT?utf8=%E2%9C%93&query=v0

What about cs_landclasses?

[KL-666]

Distributed is better, but what if each and everyone refuses to deliver? Then you still have a bad situation.

With Hooray i have difficulty to get good height of him. But generally i think he is not unreasonable in his comments. Just sometimes he can take nasty angle.

Kind regards, Vincent