@statto, I wouldn't worry about any of that garbage. So much of that statement is misleading and flat out false it isn't funny.Not worth the time to read.
and instead make those cs sources readily available.... that' ll be protecting the GPL fair status of the project instead
This makes no sense at all. No one is obligated to produce GPL material "on demand". It simply doesn't work that way. Are they trying to say if I make something and release it somewhere as GPL that I am "obligated" to keep it available until the end of time? Get real.
And no. Wllbragg does not have the cs classes. He has the v0 as well... which as you can see, luckily and happily we can access from multiple sources now
Unlike 2 days ago, before I re-release them in FGMEMBERS it happens you couldn't find them anywhere!!
This was all a total misunderstanding on their part as far as I am concerned. I just happened to copy that source from the map server to have it in case I ever want access to it. I didn't really even know what data I had and what its technical name was. I believe I gave out two semi-private links to it (solely for bandwidth considerations), one to statto (he was the first one to ask) and then one to Israel, both on request. So am I now bound to provide it for all of time? I would have happily uploaded it to any FG server on request for all to have access to. It's all just gibberish and I wouldn't give it a second thought.
And no. Wllbragg does not have the cs classes. He has the v0 as well...
I don't even think this is a correct statement. I think what I have is what would be the equivalent of the ws2.0 cs data.
The new "rounded" data that was never used for anything I believe was also called cs and that is where the confusion is coming from. That is the data that everyone is looking for. But I don't think ANYONE is "obligated" to provide it to anyone, GPL or not. GPL is not a guarantee of access.
statto, I am not sure of your concern and reasoning you feel a need to change the way you do things. ie: licensing?