Mumble Trolling

[IAHM-COL]

3) implement serious GPL compatibility auditing.

Very important. GPL compliance.

I tell you every GPL aircraft in our collection is compliant. And off course, auditing is encouraged.
As an openSource project, all our code (line per line) and every file is visible. So, if you are particularly interested in this topic, or have a fear, I can't but encourage you to make an exhaustive revision of the concern on any particular plane you may have and let us know. Let's assume something had escaped us, and I will be happy to act promptly for a fixing.

Now, there are 3 cases Thorsten alleged they are GPL and/or copyright violation. He is lying on all. And I tell you, he will indeed need to get a court ruling to indicate the contrary. I see it hard to happen because his arguments endanger not FGMEMBERS but the stability and applicability of the GPL letter at a massive scale. (Read as in every GPL software out there)

His first argument is the Space Shuttle. Which is a GPL plane. He argues his version contains non-GPL code bundled. Well, he can't write new code, add new files, he writes from scratch and for which he owns copyright,... , but as he bundled them with the GPLed SpaceShuttle he is bound to the CopyLeft Clause. But if you doubt, not only study that clause, but also revise why is it sometimes necessary an special case of license known as the Library GPL (LGPL) and recognize the shuttle is not a LGPL, but a GPL software with full protection under the law to keep it free and opensourced. So, well, Thorsten is lying there because he wants priviledges of distribution, which he can't own on that particular piece of software. He can't have either priviledges of modification.

The second argument is with the CRJ700. He claimed I altered the license of the author (from CC to GPL) by removing a readme file. The author, indeed, recognized where the real situation lies. The fact is he double licensed the aircraft before to be able to bundle it with FGDATA. He kept his fork CC, but the aircraft in FGADDon was GPL. I did not overwrote the license, but I took the license as stated on FGADDon. The problem arose because I rebased future work from his CC copy, within the GPL version of FGADDon. Somehow unfortunate due to automatic rebasings, creating a potential problem of dissecting on the whole aircraft what content was licensed CC, not GPLed. Such mess, I did not created. The author created it by double licensing in such interesting manners. (which, as sole author he could anyways!). The consequence, and return to compliance was accepting the plane was a mixed license and relocating it to the proper collection at:

https://github.com/FGMEMBERS-NONGPL/CRJ700-family

Which I feel very sorry about. One of the best aircrafts on FlightGear had been unvested of its GPL status, just for Thorsten to score a point.

The third argument is with the Omega's aircrafts. Omega included some Jeppensen charts within the sources. His planes were "license not specified" - "restricted distribution" for a good time, and thus this was not an issue. When he moved on, he agreed on re-releasing his planes on GPL, but he was not there to stay cleaning up work. The restricted sources were removed with a git commit from the planes required, and the planes returned to compliance.
As a note, the entry of this or other files is made in good faith and involuntarily, and as the group of FlightGear (either core or FGMEMBERS) detected these, they were cleaned.

I am certain the aircrafts are compliant as of now, but again, if this is something of your interest, I extend you an invitation to continue an exhaustive look.

[IAHM-COL]

Most importantly, no one among the upstream crew, nor everybody else, can be expected to fix and clean things up for you just because you don't care. I guess that it's your turn now, to show and prove that you want to be considered as people who care. The conditions mentioned above seem clear, reasonable and fair.

I am not expecting them to. And the explanations at how the conditions above are not rules, as you state, (safe exception of 3rd), but just philosophical and technical approaches at development. That's the rub. The core either takes the collection and the improvements or not .

We accept their improvements weekly, and we move forward.

If they don't, then the aircraft "diverge" (which I read, the FGADDon retraces). But at the end of the day, it just separates our community from smart users that like flying and testing the bleeding edge, and the political users, who make a vote of confidence base on political priviledges, which in most cases fall to use outdated FGADDon aircrafts.

I tried to fix that situation. I joined the Devel list and offered many times ways to work together and sync.

The final answer was:

"It will not be considered"

[IAHM-COL]

Besides, after browsing this forum for a while, I suggest that you guys stop posting insulting, abusive and gratuitous statements. You are deliberately distorting and abusing concepts like "freedom" and "free speech". Let's stop that, please. If some of you are feeling neglected by the FlightGear project for whatever reason, then man up, do your homework and implement the conditions listed above. I don't see any use in this noisy, endless bickering, and you're not helping either side: the ball is in your court, therefore either you guys do what is needed, or you just stop complaining for not being recognized as you wish, OK?

By the way, this message is the result of my own opinion and my own initiative, nothing else. There's no "strategy" whatsoever hidden behind my words, just plain common sense, so please don't make up weird theories about them.

All the best

As you close is correct. It is a matter of your own opinion. The way I see it is that our forum is largely more amiable, productive and welcoming. We are responsible (read this as in the context of Sartre's Responsibility) for our own actions and words, and nobody here is treated as a child. (you do as your parent told you)

We are all our own voice. Dissent is welcome. Ideas spread. We learn. We cooperate.

Sometimes words can hurt, and since no-one is protected via biased moderations, and words are deleted by own retraction, we kind of learn our ways to be more polite. And I think it had paid big deal, since no-one had developed a Thorsten-like personality here.

So again, that is my opinion.

Welcome to the forum, and I hope you enjoy the experience of being treated like an adult.


Sincerely
IH-COL

[Octal450]

Let me just point out that we are not trying to get the Mumble server the official one, but simply want to promote it as an option on the wiki, for people who want a better environment in Mumble. jomo and some others are considering moving to our server.

Regards,

[KL-666]

About that Quality Control issue, i do not understand something. There is a repository X (fgmembers) and repository Y (fgaddon). Repository X is full of aircraft, and Y might want some of them. X says quality (and license) is reasonably under control. Y does not trust that. What on earth withholds Y from importing a plane from X while checking by their own standards. They do the same checks when someone out of the blue wants to commit. Or do i miss something essential here?

And nice to see you lastmin-II. Quite brave to take a stance on that other forum. I gave up on them after too many oppressing action by people shielded by moderation.

Kind regards, Vincent

[IAHM-COL]

X and y... X and y...
Oh I get it now




This?




***





LOL, it is very simple, they can. They don't want to. For some of them is about loosing face value, not about technical robustness. That's what I see.

[SHM]

haha

[KL-666]

Hello lastmin-II,

Besides, after browsing this forum for a while, I suggest that you guys stop posting insulting, abusive and gratuitous statements. You are deliberately distorting and abusing concepts like "freedom" and "free speech". Let's stop that, please. If some of you are feeling neglected by the FlightGear project for whatever reason, then man up, do your homework and implement the conditions listed above. I don't see any use in this noisy, endless bickering, and you're not helping either side: the ball is in your court, therefore either you guys do what is needed, or you just stop complaining for not being recognized as you wish, OK?

I am sorry to have to disagree. You made a good analysis of the pathology of Thorsten. And there are some more. This behaviour goes and comes in waves. Coincidentally the waves of low activity are at times when this forum opens an offensive at their bad ways. You can see now that there has been an offensive, and Thorsten and co. are reasonably quiet now. So this forum has a good influence on that other forum, as long as they reveal the bad ways of that forum. Meaning that what you see as negative is actually positive.

Kind regards, Vincent