Hi Vitos! Welcome to the ForumI repeat all you said above. It is (in a way unfortunate) that you are so correct on your statements above.
I could qoute you paragraph per paraghraph and say: Hear! Hear! Vitos.
But I am not going to do that redundancy. Those interested can just read you above. I limit myself to a few additional comments:
vitos wrote:IAHM-COL wrote:You can call them Malware if you wish ;P
If You are that good, why did't You made comparable model alone, as I did, and then share it under GPL terms?
It took me years to make my model at its level, and I do not want to share if for free with people who at first calls me "fool" at public, and then takes my ideas without mentioning me. I do not even mention making money at ads plus moderating out any mentions of it.
You are correct! I apologize, and withdraw completely my statement.
Your Su15 can't be considered malware under any assumption of the term. Malware is software that does stuff the user does not know about/nor does want. The Su15 on the contrary is actually one of the best developments for FGFS. And it does not do anything unintended, as far as I can see.
I tried to reffer to proprietary addons for FG. But that is not a malware, so it is wrong to call them such.
The Tu-144 is intriguing on something additional: It's liberty on using GPL code within propietary, and that's something that definitely needs revision: But not by me, for sure.
As of Your bunch, it's GPL, and nothing keeps such people from taking ideas and parts from it. And it depends on FG anyway - changing couple of basic properties names, some shader calls, etc, at new FG version would make all models from it unusable. Again and again - while You can not do anything in response.
Yes. I am not trying to avoid people taking ideas or parts from GPL software. Nor I cant. Much of that software is not written by me at all, and as such I don't own such copyrights.
It does depend on FG, and therefore you'll see me rejecting any postulate suggesting FGMEMBERS is a fork of FlightGear.
They could change FG as to be incompatible with its own planes. That's true. And they aren't doing it so far; in part because that will be braking FG for all other aircrafts too: FGMEMBERS includes FGADDon and multiple other "venerable" hangars.
They can look into Your GPL code, find weak spots in it, something which uses features others don't, and then hit at You - legally completely.
On this side of the problem, it seems they indeed have targeted braking FG to avoid FGMEMBERS's only planes to properly function. So, I don't call them innocent. Take JWocky's JPack, which stopped working properly since FGMEMBERS inception. and all those "nasal does not allow simlink" errors they miscoded inside FG to limit users freedom to locate files where one pleases. That, I think, was a misfired attempt to only cause havoc for FGMEMBERS: Misfired, because it really was a blow to their own heads.
GPL could be heaven, and could be hell. It depends on people. With FG its hell, and You cant' help it.
Yes. It was a painful lesson to learn that I have to learn on my own flesh. Others see it and remain deluded (or brainwashed).
Just to try to fly that "Su-15" model - at least to read wiki page and manual to figure out what it is - and read forums about these three models, taking in mind a lot of what which said was moderated out later.
I was there. I saw your post about the Su15 dissapear by request of Thorsten. That was quite disheartening.
I had only wanted you to release the Su15 in a way that allows FGMEMBERS to legally redistribute. I have extended you an invitation before, and I'll do that again: Would you consider releasing the Su15 as Creative Commons BY-NC-SA-ND Non-derivatives?
It's quite easy - one guy who have rights on environment having some incomes from it.
That's exactly correct. I did not know this at all, when I first proposed FGMEMBERS as a valid alternative for FG. Then Someone told me I couldn't do that ethically, which was a surprise to me. They argued I needed to first present it on the Devel List, which I did. Then that guy you are talking about shot it down, vetoed the proposal, and then went as far as banning me from being able to send information to both the devel list and the forum.
And then they began a paranoia and propaganda war to try to destroy FGMEMBERS at all cost.
Wasn't FlightGear GPL was the only question left to be ask.
And JWocky's answer to me was: you are causing that one guy to loose money.
I found trouble understanding that statement, that you point again above. But I now see it.
For example, all external stuff at Blender is calculated at Python. It's common language, GPL, there is tons of freeware procedures - why to invent own Nasal then at FG, which hangs on interpolators, etc? Quite simply, Python is not controllable.
At some other simulators You can just compile own libraries at any language, with ins and outs defined. C++ library is quite fast, it would run on any Hzs, with different own times for procedures, why not [in FlightGear]? Same thing.
Yup. That's all I need to say.
I also had experience myself the utter like of help on the forum when problems present or when you need to understand something on how to develop for FG. They wont tell you with transparency. And the documentation is nonexistent and most, and terribly useless where available.
So, if some other OS simulator will be made completely other way, without taking parts from FG, parts of it will not be ripped to FG, even if these was GPL. There is no people left at FG who could make it after all.
This is something we have put on the table a few times. To completely part ways. I have been uninterested to take such task, actually.
It's just too much for my own interest.
But It will be something really great to see happening. A new GPL flightsimulator that is far from all the political mayhem behind the FG closed curtains. That'll be lovely!!
