Hi, Martin Spott schrieb: > The story _I_ was told reads like this: > > They have severe difficulties with their user authentication because > the protocol they use is considered to be "braindead" (TM). So they try > to hide the drawbacks of their authentication protocol by forcing > people to sign an NDA - which therefore gives them a handle to control > who'll implement the protocol.
Heh! Given that they didn't change their protocol over the years, I know what is meant by braindead. Once upon a time I worked on a KDE port of ProController, their radar application at that time. I got the protocol specs _without_ signing an NDA. Their network chief was not amused - to say the least - as he found out about our (we were already two at the time) client being used on their network. At least that's what he said. They seemed to have "structural" problems at the time and it might not have fit his plan to see an open-sourced tool implementing the protocol. BTW: Their server-software used to be open-source as well and as far as I can see, it has vanished... When they switched to the new radar client, I tried to keep up, but with the team at that time (not their head, Julian Smart, but instead those who wanted to work at it then) no cooperation was possible and my time is valuable. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
