Boris Koenig wrote:
Frederic is right that a plugin system is actually in contrast with the GPL (FlightGear's license), that requires everything to be opened when using some piece of GPL software within your project.
I don't think that would be a major problem, there's other opensource
(GPL'ed) software that makes use of modular enhancements (aka
"plugins")- the most prominent example being the Linux Kernel itself, whose plugin architecture meanwhile supports licence-validation - i.e. a
module needs to provide the licence under which it is available in
order to be loaded (This is a kernel 2.65 addition I think).
I'm still not convinced that a plugin system would be such a great idea for FlightGear. The project has outgrown C and even C++ by using some clever subsytem architecture and by using the property tree. Adding new code is quite easy, but by introducing a plugin loader we would be put right back into the C world, using structures to pass variables around.
Besides, most everything can be done in FlightGear without touching any code. Only special cases or additions need to be coded in C++. And I'm still not sure whether your flitetutor isn't outgrowing FlightGear's purpose. Adding a basic, menu accessible Flight Tutorial is probably in line with the project, but moving instruments around and even panel design within FlightGear is out of scope of the program I'm afraid.
I would love to hear other opinions about that though.
Erik
_______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
