Board index FlightGear Development

GPL vs. CC licenses for development

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: Bell AH-1W SuperCobra

Postby bell_pilot » Sun Feb 07, 2021 10:33 pm

Only who would like to contribute write this topic please. I dont need empty words.
Real Helicopter Pilot 1500+ hours
AB206,UH-1H,AH-1W
MSc Aerospace Engineering
bell_pilot
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:08 am
OS: Windows10,Ubuntu20

Re: Bell AH-1W SuperCobra

Postby wlbragg » Mon Feb 08, 2021 6:27 pm

Sorry, I have to say, discussing what license to continue existing work under or to create new work is not "empty words" or off topic when someone suggests a license to proceed under, even though it went farther than maybe it needed to.
You may not like it or have much use for it in a development mentality when you main goal is to build a first class aircraft, but it is very important ground work you should have nailed down before you begin, not afterward. As has already happened here, it can create complications.
Kansas and Ohio/Midwest scenery development.
KEQA, 3AU, KRCP Airport Layout
Intel i7/GeForce RTX 2070/Max-Q
User avatar
wlbragg
 
Posts: 7574
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 12:31 am
Location: Kansas (Tornado Alley), USA
Callsign: WC2020
Version: next
OS: Win10/Linux/RTX 2070

Re: GPL vs. CC licenses for development

Postby bell_pilot » Tue Feb 09, 2021 2:39 am

My 3 days in 3 FG communities:
X said Y to sthng and X banned. Z heard about it and left X alone. X migrated and group up some other QWERTY guys and make best FDM. K forked M's work licensed under GPL and sold it to Elon Musk. So M and other members cursed K about selling a GPL licensed work. After that P started to use CC. He tought CC(an informal, would protect his works against thieves. P told to the community about using CC but J disagreed. Cos' CC is againt the philosopy behind the FlightGear. Then P lefted the community and become an hostile fork....
Real Helicopter Pilot 1500+ hours
AB206,UH-1H,AH-1W
MSc Aerospace Engineering
bell_pilot
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2021 12:08 am
OS: Windows10,Ubuntu20

Re: GPL vs. CC licenses for development

Postby erik » Tue Feb 09, 2021 9:07 am

Just forget about FGMembers and Bomber.
Bomber is actually a nice guy but sometimes difficult to work with though.

But the license may be important for developers you are trying to invite. Some won't work with anything other than GPL and some will not work on a GPL project. The main difference is whether you will accept a potential commercial party to use your work or not. The GPL only guarantees that the work will be open and available, but commercial use is not prohibited.

If you decide to join the developers of FGUK, or want to start using their 3d model, then the license is set in stone: Non commercial Creative Commons it is.

Erik
Current: Parachutist, Paraglider, Pterosaur, Pilatus PC-9M and variants, ERCO Ercoupe, Fokker Dr.1, Fokker 50, Fokker 100
Less active: Cessna T-37, T-38, Santa Claus. Previous: General Dynamics F-16. Worked on: Wright Flyer
erik
 
Posts: 2238
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 2:41 pm

Re: GPL vs. CC licenses for development

Postby www2 » Tue Feb 16, 2021 12:31 am

My view on this topic is that Creative Commons Attribution can use in for sounds, artwork and models.
there is a but.
CC0 and CC-BY 4.0 or later we can use with our gpl version and only a notify the text of the aircraft for the source and the file license (CC-BY only).
Where CC-BY 4.0 can be use
For CC-BY-SA, CC-BY-NC, CC-BY-NC-SA can use in a dual license setup where CC license are use as a standalone licenes for the case that is out of the scope of the GPL e.g. use in a TV series, movie, 3d printing, etc.
Where the CC-BY-ND and CC-BY-NC-ND is forbidden for use in the as a part of main stream flightgear release(fgaddons/fgdata).

But this my 0.02 euro on the CC vs GPL discution.
source: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-li ... leLicenses

In a other case i see not a problem that we use 3th party data for navaids database e.g. navigraph this is allow in the gpl so long if the user install or allow by the provider in this case navigraph.
This mean is that linux distribution need to have a flightgear-navdata-nonfree pagacket or flightgear ask user with navigaton database the user wand to use include the advantage/disadvantage each option.
When a user select navigrave demo file than flightgear download the demo file form ower server or from navigraph else use the current building data.
Beside this there is also option for loading a newer navdatabase from navigraph for the users that have a navigraph account.
The only problem with this is that on each change of navigation database there is a rebuild of the scenery but this is easy to do as a overlay.
This is also a good idea to depricade the navigation database (nav.dat) from the scenery builds.
I see there are more problems if re going on this route.
But this is need to discus in his own toppic.
www2
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 2:58 pm
OS: Ubuntu

Re: GPL vs. CC licenses for development

Postby Johan G » Tue Feb 16, 2021 2:21 pm

Some posts where split off to the new topic Depricating apt.dat and using Navigraph for scenery builds.
Low-level flying — It's all fun and games till someone looses an engine. (Paraphrased from a YouTube video)
Improving the Dassault Mirage F1 (Wiki, Forum, GitLab. Work in slow progress)
Some YouTube videos
Johan G
Moderator
 
Posts: 6625
Joined: Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:33 pm
Location: Sweden
Callsign: SE-JG
IRC name: Johan_G
Version: 2020.3.4
OS: Windows 10, 64 bit

Previous

Return to Development

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests