Board index FlightGear Development Aircraft

A380 omega95  Topic is solved

Questions and discussion about creating aircraft. Flight dynamics, 3d models, cockpits, systems, animation, textures.

Re: A380 omega95

Postby legoboyvdlp » Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:47 pm

So, what's the process for getting rid of it, in those cases, then?
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 6735
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Callsign: YV-LEGO
Version: 2018.3.1
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: A380 omega95

Postby wkitty42 » Thu Feb 11, 2016 10:28 pm

Thorsten wrote in Thu Feb 11, 2016 1:45 pm:Saying that you are young and are only learning won't help you or make it legal. Underage users making copyrighted material available have been prosecuted just as well.

as have their parents due the the underage user downloading and distributing audio and video media via p2p networks...
"You get more air close to the ground," said Angalo. "I read that in a book. You get lots of air low down, and not much when you go up."
"Why not?" said Gurder.
"Dunno. It's frightened of heights, I guess."
User avatar
wkitty42
 
Posts: 5431
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2015 3:46 pm
Location: central NC, USA
Callsign: wk42
Version: git next
OS: Kubuntu 14.04.5

Re: A380 omega95

Postby daweed » Fri Feb 12, 2016 3:41 pm

Thorsten wrote in Wed Feb 10, 2016 6:02 am:Unless FGMembers does now content auditing for compliance with copyright and has dealt with the historic violations, no direct links from the forum to their repository please - it's legally equivalent to linking to a stash of pirated software and the forum admin is liable.


Not correct, as if some content may be problematic, some other are clearly, GPL , and clean ...

Hosting & content are 2 diffrent things

Tell things in the right way, u & other don't want link here because u don't like way they make their work, but all the repo does not link to pirated content

Some author set their work on this repo with this knowledge
Linux Mint 18.3
AMD FX 4300 Quad-Core Black Edition|20 Go RAMGeForce GTX 750 Ti
FG Interface
Lyon Saint Exupery Scenery

ATC on LFLL on Friday 19:00 UTC => 22:00 UTC
daweed
 
Posts: 299
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 10:45 am
Location: LFKP LFLL
Callsign: daweed
OS: Windows 10 Familly

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Thorsten » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:05 pm

Not correct, as if some content may be problematic, some other are clearly, GPL , and clean ...


I'm sorry, but no one here has the resources to sort out which is which, so there's no choice but to treat everything that has not had access gatekeeping as potentially problematic.

I've actually said this earlier (I'm surprised you missed it) - let me quote the relevant passages again for your convenience:

You're trying to solve this case by case that's brought to your attention - but the truth is that the FG developers aren't interested in doing content auditing for FGMembers (and wouldn't have the resources anyway). I think even during the month or so people have been looking, there's been several copyright violations documented (and posted here in the forum). That's ample evidence that the access procedure is flawed and will continue to produce problems - I don't need to identify every problematic case to come to that conclusion.

So personally I think the train has passed - I don't think you'd find any distributor who takes licensing seriously who touches a repository with such a history (and I wouldn't hold my breath that FG ever allows access via something like the aircraft center - the legal liability question doesn't go away) - even if you'd do gatekeeping right now, you'd have to go back commit by commit and establish proper licensing in every case. That's very unfortunate for the large amount of honest and properly licensed work that's gone into the repository as well
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10643
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Hooray » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:17 pm

note that the aircraft center comment may not be such an issue as long as 3rd party hangars can be manually added in the form if URLs and/or XML files for new repositories, which is in line with how package management generally works on Linux/Unix-based operating systems, which is to say that people may still be able to explicitly add 3rd party hangars manually, even without such hangars/addons being exlicitly endorsed/supported by the fg community.

That being said, it seems that the Aircraft Center is meanwhile considered an "experiment", so that the Phi GUI and the Qt5 launcher may be the most likely platforms for package manager functionality, without being tied to Nasal/Canvas.
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: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby bugman » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:20 pm

sanhozay wrote in Thu Feb 11, 2016 10:37 am:
Thorsten wrote in Thu Feb 11, 2016 6:39 am:the truth is that the FG developers aren't interested in doing content auditing for FGMembers

I suspect that FG developers in general are not interested in doing content auditing for FGADDON either; and rightly so. Development is more productive and rewarding than auditing.


This auditing is exactly what is done within the FlightGear project. Have a look at the old flightgear-commitlogs mailing list from before the FGData and FGAddon split, as well as the new flightgear-fgaddon-commitlogs mailing list:


Anyone interested in following every last change to FGAddon can subscribe to the flightgear-fgaddon-commitlogs list.

Regards,
Edward
bugman
Moderator
 
Posts: 1650
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2015 9:01 am
Version: next

Re: A380 omega95

Postby sanhozay » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:28 pm

Hmm, I guess I should clarify that by "FG developers in general are not interested in doing content auditing", I meant that they would rather be doing something else, not that there is nothing in place for it to be done.
sanhozay
 
Posts: 1207
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 11:57 am
Location: EGNM
Callsign: G-SHOZ
Version: Git
OS: Ubuntu 16.04

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Hooray » Fri Feb 12, 2016 4:29 pm

@bugman: please let's not fool ourselves here, a number of senior contributors have stated on several occasions that we generally don't peer-review/audit new features at all, which also has to do with a general lack of manpower - and that applies to the main project, and even more so to external efforts, certainly including fgmembers or efforts that don't manage to align well with the rest of the project

Just because there's mailing list with commit logs, that doesn't mean that things are actually audited or reviewed properly, an actual "audit" is a completely different thing.
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: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby legoboyvdlp » Fri Feb 12, 2016 5:03 pm

Anyway, all this aside, I am impressed by Narendran's aircraft. It is not complete by any means, but it is quite stunning. I love the elctronic checklists included.

It's a nice FDM -- with reasonable FPS, I did a good landing -- best landing ever in fact. Right on the centreline, on speed, on the touchdown markers....
User avatar
legoboyvdlp
 
Posts: 6735
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 1:28 am
Callsign: YV-LEGO
Version: 2018.3.1
OS: Windows 10 HP

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Thorsten » Fri Feb 12, 2016 6:29 pm

a number of senior contributors have stated on several occasions that we generally don't peer-review/audit new features at all


Please let's not fool others here - that's been said in the context of technical reviews of code meshing with the rest of the project, not in the context of copyright infringements.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10643
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Hooray » Fri Feb 12, 2016 7:08 pm

agreed, but even most copyright issues became only apparent well after the fact (commit), so it's not like we generally peer-review each and every commit that is made to fgdata/fgaddon and question the source of materials/contents - which is not to say that we don't care about such issues, but that many things simply "slip through".
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: 11317
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 8:40 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Thorsten » Sat Feb 13, 2016 7:17 am

I think that kind of argument is a fallacy.

First, you don't know how many licensing issues were caught immediately and never committed, because they never made it onto your horizon. There's material posted in the forum which we've seen Israel happily committing, whereas usually the first question asked FG-side is 'Is this GPL?' and if it's not, you never see more of it. You only see the cases more prominently when something gets committed.

Second, we don't habitually question every commit that's made to FGData by committers, but we do pick the committers based on having a track record of good judgement and we habitually review the merge requests by everyone else. At least I usually discuss licensing issues before committing for anyone else. Several cases I witnessed also haven't become apparent 'well' after a commit but 'a day' after a commit.

Third, the fact that a procedure isn't 100% perfect is not an argument that it's equivalent to not implement the procedure at all. If not being 100% perfect would be a knockout criterion, you could dispense with immigration controls, airport security, vehicle inspections and similar. In the real world, procedures are hardly ever perfect and what counts is how good they are.

Your (and sanhozay's) general sentiment seems to be a kind of 'you too' argument - like: 'just because you can't guarantee that your procedure is 100% safe, we don't need to implement the procedure at all and achieve the same result. 'Unfortunately, that's not valid reasoning.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10643
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby sanhozay » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:26 am

I'm not sure about the placement of the words "you" and "we" in the last paragraph. I don't have commit access to FGMEMBERS but I do have commit access to FGADDON.

My general sentiment is that, after all the counterproductive events of last year, FGMEMBERS should be left to get on with what they are doing in peace. I am not aware of an official ban on referring to their repository or forum, unless it is repeated and excessive. Perhaps a moderator could clarify?
sanhozay
 
Posts: 1207
Joined: Thu Dec 26, 2013 11:57 am
Location: EGNM
Callsign: G-SHOZ
Version: Git
OS: Ubuntu 16.04

Re: A380 omega95

Postby Thorsten » Sat Feb 13, 2016 10:08 am

FGMEMBERS should be left to get on with what they are doing in peace. I am not aware of an official ban on referring to their repository or forum, unless it is repeated and excessive.


There's no ban on referring to them, but there's the legal issue of directly linking to content which (based on past experience), is likely to be questionable in licensing, and there has been a policy of removing any such direct links from the forum in the past.

Not only FGMembers should be left to get on in peace, FG should be as well without being dragged into the legal mess some people have created. They have their own forum where they can take their own legal risks.
Thorsten
 
Posts: 10643
Joined: Mon Nov 02, 2009 8:33 am

Re: A380 omega95

Postby stuart » Sun Feb 14, 2016 9:37 pm

(Mod hat on)

Hi All,

There is no ban on referring to FGMEMBERS on this forum. There's also no ban on linking directly to FGMEMBERS repositories.

Clearly that's subject to people being sensible. sanhozay has got it right - people should be left to get on with what they are doing in peace. Any further comments on this thread will be viewed with this in mind and I may lock this topic.

-Stuart (the mod)
G-MWLX
User avatar
stuart
Moderator
 
Posts: 1469
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 9:56 am
Location: Edinburgh
Callsign: G-MWLX

PreviousNext

Return to Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 2 guests