I didn't look at your code, and didn't check which projects are affected (fgfs & fgms ?) - but in general, it would seem like a good idea to get in touch with the people who previously committed changes to the affected files. If this affects fgms, you will want to get in touch with the fgms developer obviously - and regarding fgfs, you can check the git history.
Note that these people will probably be pretty busy, but even just getting their
signed-off-by may help to have other/active developers show willingness to review/discuss/commit your changes.
That being said, we've discussed a bunch of sensible MP improvements over the years - but HLA is gaining more and more traction, so that people are obviously hoping for the existing MP implementation to be depreciated and replaced with a more flexible HLA-based implementation. On the other hand, this also meant that a number of good ideas didn't end up being implemented, out of fear of wasting our time because of all the HLA work...
Overall, the main issue concerning changes to the existing MP code will be maintaining compatibility with the old system - so if your changes are backward compatible, you should definitely say so - if they are not, it will be REALLY difficult/painful to convince people, especially given the inertia in the MP department.
Generally, the question is how long it will take for HLA to become a viable alternative - I have a bunch of experimental branches here that extend AndersG's binary generic protocol, so that PUBLISH/SUBSCRIBE could be supported in a fashion similar to how the telnet protocol supports both using "onChange"-listeners, a feature I needed for a different project.
Which basically means that the existing MP protocol could be implemented on top of the generic protocol, and the (unmaintained) C++ code could be yanked. On the other hand, in comparison to HLA, all of such attempts would obviously be really ugly hacks
To state the obvious, HLA has been frequently brought up during such discussions, but it hasn't yet really materialized to really be a feasible MP replacement at the moment - and I do know, that F-JJTH is also affected by this "HLA movement", because of his fgais code.
Finally, I would suggest to file a gitorious merge request and use the issue tracker to log a review request, that should get you some developer attention (hopefully), and is more future-proof than using the forum or the devel list:
https://code.google.com/p/flightgear-bu ... %20request