Board index FlightGear Development

The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

FlightGear is opensource, so you can be the developer. In the need for help on anything? We are here to help you.
Forum rules
Core development is discussed on the official FlightGear-Devel development mailing list.

Bugs can be reported in the bug tracker.

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Jabberwocky » Mon Aug 31, 2015 11:09 pm

Now we had this strange 180 degree turn in the logic. The original accusation was GPL in FGMEMBERS would violate license rights due to included non-GPL parts. Which was never the case because non-GPL planes are not in the regular FGMEMBERS. After I pointed this out, suddenly it is "it is possible that some license holder gave a permission to distribute parts of his work as GPL" ... which is a general statement and has nothing specific to do with FGMEMBERS and is also not a contradiction of what I said earlier. Any license holder who published works under other than GPL license can later also publish parts of this work under GPL and if he does so, a plane that only includes GPL licensed parts can be in FGMEMBERS. So ... FGMEMBERS has here no problem.
The only problem I found is, FGMEMBERS was definitively formed too late. There is some history from 1012 or before that had already been lost. I can't find any working Alouette III under JSB and Dave Culp's working AH1S under JSB seems also to be gone with the wind. The only version drifting around seems to crash FG. So ... since FGADDON, the one and only "official" plane collection allegedly never lost history (while FGMEMBERS didn't get some aircraft that were already completely lost before 2013) ... do you have those helicopters somewhere? There is also an R22 JSB somewhere, but it was on Gitorius and Gitorius closed (and the R22 under JSB was never on the website as far as I can see).
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby legoboyvdlp » Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:12 am

So if what Thorsten says is right, you can't take a CC-BY-SA plane and dostribute it, under the CC-BY-SA liscence? Forgive me, I have lost track of this argument.
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 7090
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Callsign: YV-LEGO
Version: 2018.3.1
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Thorsten » Tue Sep 01, 2015 4:57 am

Now we had this strange 180 degree turn in the logic. The original accusation was GPL in FGMEMBERS would violate license rights due to included non-GPL parts. Which was never the case because non-GPL planes are not in the regular FGMEMBERS.



No, my logic stayed the same, maybe your version of it turned?

I was from the beginning pointing out that FGMEMBERS takes non-GPL licensed material and re-distributes as GPL and that this violates copyright. No idea what you were talking about. The assertion that this wouldn't happen is cute, but I know for a fact that it does and have pointed out one case in this thread.

If you refuse to read what I have written so far, I'm not surprised a staightforward logical argument confuses you.

I much agree with you that FGMEMBERS should operate the way you describe, i.e. only distribute material it has permission to distribute, distribute non-GPL as non-GPL, do proper version control, etc, however my whole point is that for several reasons it in reality actually does not.

These reasons, as far as I can see, are chiefly the lack of gatekeeping and, for the planes which are not developed on FGMEMBERS, the lack of maintainer feedback - if nobody is really responsible for a plane because it is 'just' distributed automagically, mistakes tend to happen and lack of clear responsibility translates into a poor way of fixing them.

Which is why we have gatekeeping and volunteer submissions to FGAddon - so that responsibility is clearly assigned.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Hooray » Tue Sep 01, 2015 1:00 pm

Which is why we have gatekeeping and volunteer submissions to FGAddon - so that responsibility is clearly assigned.
without that necessarily meaning that this actually works particularly well for the project (thinking about the removal of the Honda jet or GrTux's contributions)
Please don't send support requests by PM, instead post your questions on the forum so that all users can contribute and benefit
Thanks & all the best,
Hooray
Help write next month's newsletter !
pui2canvas | MapStructure | Canvas Development | Programming resources
Hooray
 
Posts: 11340
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Thorsten » Tue Sep 01, 2015 4:59 pm

At least for the Honda jet, there's considerable doubt whether that was actually on a shaky legal footing - I'm sure you are aware that Curt essentially said that he didn't feel like weathering a legal case over this, even with a fair chance at not losing it. So I don't get the point (again, it seems).

The salient issue seems to be that problematic content is pulled quickly once identified - see the recent case of the FSX sound file.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Jabberwocky » Tue Sep 01, 2015 5:46 pm

Funny ...

but then, someone who makes himself gatekeeper without a clear cut rule set probably always claims to got the point. Remember, this whole mess started when FGADDON rejected planes as "not good enough" without wven providing a definition of "good enough". It was pure on the seats of the pants decision making. So, a lot of people felt, we don't need a censor in plane development, we rather need a place to develop together. Which was of course against the philosophy to hold some kind of "ownership".
There are two kinds of people developing aircraft. The ones always yelling "me me me" starting flame wars if their imaginary "rights" are threatened in any form and other who look at an aircraft and say "well, a pushback would be nice" or "well, the real tank configuration would be nice" and then do it. Half of the time, they forget to write their authorship for this part into the files, which leads to another mess, but well, it is what it is.
So, in case, one here feels, he is one of those "ego-pilots" who "owns" something, go ahead and try to bring your threats and imaginations about GPL into reality. Unfortunately, since this kind of threat is not new, we had already cases in which we had to discuss this subject with the GNU foundation and lawyers and when it comes to international laws it is really a mess because an author sits in one country, the one complaining in another ... well, all of this. So well, as of yet, everyone making the exactly same claims as made in this thread has backed off because there was no chance to actually get through with anything based on what is merely claim but not legal status.
So, since we all know that, lets just call this what it is, another little propaganda trick of those who want to be gatekeepers. Oh the attraction of power must be so enticing, right? But we had this now what? Six times, seven times? And despite all stunts, FGMEMBERS is well and alive and comes more and more into the centre of developing in groups instead alone in your basement. Aside of that, FGADDON still has not all planes FGMEMBERS has, as it looks to me. And the ones lost years before FGMEMBERS came up prove only, we would have needed something like that years earlier.
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby bugman » Tue Sep 01, 2015 7:42 pm

Image
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Jabberwocky » Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:37 pm

LMAO ... on the other hand, some moments at this forum reminded me more of:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNA6O4DfwCs
Jabberwocky
Retired
 
Posts: 1319
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 7:36 pm
Callsign: JWOCKY
Version: 3.0.0
OS: Ubuntu 14.04

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Thorsten » Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:00 am

but then, someone who makes himself gatekeeper without a clear cut rule set probably always claims to got the point.


Would it be too much to ask after having explained this at least ten times (once in this thread) that you distinguish between TorstenD (who is admin of FGAddon and was part of creating it) and me (ThorstenR - note the 'h') who has just commit rights on the repository and didn't create anything?

Would it also be too much to ask that you read the FGAddon policy draft before claiming there is no clear rule set?

Remember, this whole mess started when FGADDON rejected planes as "not good enough" without wven providing a definition of "good enough".


No, it actually started when Israel felt that GIT is much better than SVN and we had technical discussions on the relative merits of both systems. The rest came later as all people who were dissatisfied with the state of affairs jumped on the bandwagon. But things seemed to continue with lively fights at FGMEMBERS from there - shared antagonism doesn't translate into team spirit after all.

Oh, the tedium of establishing facts before writing a post...

Unfortunately, since this kind of threat is not new, we had already cases in which we had to discuss this subject with the GNU foundation


Unfortunately, we already established that you invented this story, since the quoted 'response' of the GNU lawyers was 180 degrees contrary to the contents of the license. So kindly stop lecturing us on license issues, I know by now you haven't bothered to read it. There hasn't be a single actual argument based on license texts from your side - not one. Go figure...


Aside of that, FGADDON still has not all planes FGMEMBERS has, as it looks to me.


Yes - see above, you can do this by grabbing whatever content you can against stated intentions of developers and by discarding copyright issues when shouting copyleft very loud. As I said above - if that makes you proud...

If you decide to go with voluntary submission, you'll always have less planes than if you grab what you can. If you decide to exploit workers, you'll always have cheaper coffee than if you pay fair prices. Your point is?
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby legoboyvdlp » Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:39 pm

That you are absolutely wrong.
Git, IS much better than SVN. Should have kept with it.
And I went to FGMEMBERS since it is by far much more convenient.
With one command, git pull, bang new fgdata. And you don't need to be a linux user or a rocket scientist to use it.
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 7090
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Callsign: YV-LEGO
Version: 2018.3.1
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby Thorsten » Wed Sep 02, 2015 2:04 pm

That you are absolutely wrong.
Git, IS much better than SVN. Should have kept with it.


Oh my... how would I be wrong here? I much prefer GIT.

For the record, I actually argued for keeping GIT. But the thing with being part of a team is that you can't always get what you want. So there was a decision to move to SVN which is supported by the majority of the team, and I have to go with it.

From that perspective, FGMEMBERS is just opting out of team-play. Wanting to keep all the goodies of being part of FG (using the Wiki, the forum, the distribution infrastructure...) without having to abide by majority decisions. You see, it's not at all about respecting developers more - FGMEMBERS has grabbed stuff over the explicit wish of the developers not to, which would never be possible if it were actually about respect. It's just a way for some people who can't abide by team decisions to get their own way. And the thing they like least is mentioning that it's an un-official fork.

See, I don't mind the existence of FGMEMBERS, but I do mind this halfway thing of wanting to have all the goodies the rest of us get without having to abide by group decisions. If they'd remove themselves to their own forum/wiki/mailing list, it'd be more consistent for a forked project.


Edit: And as for your convenience...

Consider two coffee chains. One of them pays fair wages to the planters and to the serving staff and tries hard to hire disadvantaged people - who might be slower or have language problems. The other essentially enslaves the planters and pays minimum wages to serving staff, making them rely on tips for their income.

The first chain will offer pricy coffee, perhaps slowly served. The second will be able to offer cheap coffee and very friendly staff. Much more convenient for you.

As with coffee, your convenience comes at a price - which someone else has to pay. In the event, that'd be users confused by the dual infrastructure who don't know where to get the authoritive version of a plane offhand (as you have experienced yourself, that's non-trivial). And people trying to trace bugs like me who now need to spend extra time if the user doesn't report precisely what version of what aircraft the problem has (yes, it took me 15 minutes to verify that I don't have the buggy Shuttle version nowhere myself and that Israel must have wrecked it - 15 minutes I could have spent on an actual problem. And whenever I take an aircraft-related bug, I now need extra time to establish version). So from where I stand, a GIT repository would have been better than an SVN repository, but having two repositories partially duplicating each other is the worst of all possible worlds. I see why it is convenient for you though.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 11087
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby DFaber » Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:18 pm

legoboyvdlp wrote in Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:39 pm:That you are absolutely wrong.
Git, IS much better than SVN. Should have kept with it.


this is your very personal opinion.
I prefer SVN. I was never really comfortable using GIT and never intended to learn all the whistles and bells GIT might offer. I just wanted to maintain my Aircraft.
Stop pretending that there is an absolute Argument t use GIT. You have your thruth, I got mine.

Greetings
Detlef Faber
FlightGear Development:
http://flightgear-de.net

German FlightGear Forum
http://forum.flightgear-de.net
DFaber
 
Posts: 687
Joined: Fri Dec 01, 2006 7:51 pm
Location: Aachen, Germany
Version: GIT
OS: Linux

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby IAHM-COL » Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:42 pm

DFaber wrote in Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:18 pm: You have your thruth, I got mine.

Greetings



My exact point!. D. Faber.
You have a SVN option. We have a git option.

It's a matter of taste. Thorsten, would have said, something like chocolates ;)

Greetings.
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby IAHM-COL » Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:09 pm

Thorsten wrote in Wed Sep 02, 2015 2:04 pm:If they'd remove themselves to their own forum/wiki/mailing list, it'd be more consistent for a forked project.


Explaining how and why FGMEMBERS is not a fork (of flightgear) had been done "ad nauseaum" before. Read back to instruct yourself.


Best,
IH-cOL
If we gave everybody in the World free software today, but we failed to teach them about the four freedoms, five years from now, would they still have it? Probably not, because if they don’t recognise their freedoms, they’ll let their freedoms fall
User avatar
IAHM-COL
Retired
 
Posts: 4064
Joined: Wed Aug 08, 2012 5:40 pm
Location: Homey, NV (KXTA) - U.S.A
Callsign: HK-424D or ICAO4243
Version: 3.7-git
OS: Linux

Re: The GNU GPL license and unwritten rules of curtesy

Postby bugman » Wed Sep 02, 2015 5:44 pm

IAHM-COL wrote in Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:42 pm:
DFaber wrote in Wed Sep 02, 2015 4:18 pm: You have your thruth, I got mine.

Greetings



My exact point!. D. Faber.
You have a SVN option. We have a git option.

It's a matter of taste. Thorsten, would have said, something like chocolates ;)

Greetings.


The FGMEMBERS question is a bit more than taste between svn and git! It is also a new, experimental development philosophy and a new distribution mechanism, combined into one.

FGMEMBERS has a rather unique development philosophy. The experimental design is quite different to how most existent open source projects work - in essence it is a very pure and unadulterated form of anarchism. By construct, there is zero hierarchy and it removes all authority. Everyone and anyone is free to change whichever part of the system as they see fit to advance development. No one can block the development of others, and there are zero barriers of entry. No one can claim their own kingdom over a set of aircraft and prevent others from developing and committing to those models. There are no gatekeepers.

On top of this new development philosophy, it is a mass collection of everything out there, warts and all. FGMEMBERS is also an aircraft distribution mechanism. This brings the external FGMEMBERS project into direct competition with one of the core parts of FG listed in the roadmap aims of the soon to be published official FlightGear policy and roadmap document. Specifically the FG inbuilt package management distribution mechanism. This will be the future FG way of providing access to all official FGAddon + venerable private hangar aircraft for one-click direct download from within the sim (the version controlled ones released for specific FG versions, that is).

So this is clearly more than just choosing git over svn.

Regards,

Edward


P. S. If you missed the previous keymaster/gatekeeper reference:

bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

PreviousNext

Return to Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Applebot [Bot] and 1 guest