Hi, Jon Stockill wrote: > This needs to take into account the platforms that flightgear is used > on. If it's closed source then ideally whoever produces the app is going > to need the capability to build (at the very minimum) linux, mac, and > windows binaries, since handing the source over to someone else to let > them build for their own platform isn't an option.
Not necessarily. I think, Holger was talking about some kind of proxy server. In terms of server OS, we don't need to be that picky, although I would term it a benefit if the server could be run on all OS' flightgear runs on. Curt, as far as I understood it, VATSIM asked Holger wether he wanted to write such a proxy, which I interpreted as an expression of interest from their side, so I don't think that the interest is single sided. Of course we could benefit from an integration with an already established network with a huge number of participants. My work with the technical staff of the VATSIM network was some time in the past, so maybe something has changed. However, from what I had seen in those days and the fact that the protocol is still closed, I'm a bit suspicious. BTW: I didn't know that VATSIM is commercially dependent on closing down the protocol... I will drop out of the thread here, because this is getting more destructive criticism than I wanted it to become... Cheers, Ralf ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
