On Wed, 07 Apr 2004 16:50:44 -0700 Andy Ross wrote: > Jorge Van Hemelryck wrote: > > We already have an external HUD code. Actually, it is quite large, > > [...] and more importantly it can't be distributed. At all. > > That was my fear. Opinions differ (widely!) on this point. But in > general, adding a dynamic loading API to a free software project for > the sole purpose of interfacing to non-free software is not considered > to be within the spirit of the GPL. > > > Therefore, I'm doing the best I can (that is, mixing my hobbies and > > my work, and working at home) in order to make flightgear benefit > > from this. > > I don't want to start a flame war here, but it's not clear to me that > the FlightGear community would receive any benefit from having an > interface layer to software it cannot use. The standard GNU/FSF > argument is that, by enabling and protecting proprietary development > (of HUD modules, in this case), it would in fact discourage free > software contributions. > > You are right, of course, that you are under no obligation to > distribute your internally-developed modifications to FlightGear. The > GPL only requires that *if* you distribute them, you do so under the > same license. Accepting this interface layer as part of FlightGear > would have the effect of removing that restriction. I do not mean to > seem ungrateful, but I'm not sure that's in the community's best > interest.
Two things : - With all my good will, it still would not be possible to release the code. It's not just that it is proprietary. This is a minor issue, because actually it's even protected by confidentiality (it's a military simulator). I love this simulator, and I strongly support free software whenever I can, at work and at home. Some times I just can't do what I would like to do. Are you telling me that you wish to make it difficult for some people to use FlightGear ? That would be a pity. Actually, my own problem at work is now solved, I just wanted to submit my work (done outside working hours) to the community. I knew that some people would react like you did, that is why I developed the functionality on my own. Is it not possible to just include my work (with some improvements such as conditional compilation of the functionality) with the distribution of FlightGear ? It would make my task of making people accept FlightGear here easier... - Maybe this new functionality would just increase the number of applications that could use FlightGear (applications that otherwise would have considered buying proprietary software). It should be a good thing, as far as public relations are concerned. More publicity... I'll try and make it as official as possible. Would FlightGear not benefit by some kind of official government endorsement ? Later, I'll try and support funding of additional development (under the GPL) of FlightGear if we need new functions, especially in the multiplayer part of FlightGear. -- Jorge Van Hemelryck _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
