Thorsten wrote in Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:03 pm:LNM is open source so can't one of you wizards write a code to make it work.
Lots of people in the team would be able to do that if they wanted I guess. But given that we already have Phi as navigation map / instructor panel / external interface to FG - why would someone spent his time duplicating what it does?
Or is the tool so much better than Phi? If there's functionality missing in Phi, I'm guessing TorstenD would prefer to add it rather than provide a second tool.
Johan G wrote in Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:47 pm:Took the liberty to merge the two topics. Also moved the topic.
wkitty42 wrote in Thu Oct 17, 2019 5:58 pm:first thought on this last statement is: there was $$$ to be had in the motel business... not so much in the FOSS world...
as far as LNM interfacing goes, unless a developer with FG is also using LNM and decides to get involved, it is up to LNM (or someone else with the knowledge) to handle the interfacing... i know a lot of coders that use "really complicated" as an (initial?) excuse... but i also know that one has to know the different systems to do things like this and that's not always easy... LNM may interface with (eg) 10 different simulators... that means they have to know at least some part of those 10 different simulators... ISTR something about a 3rd party middleware tool used between LNM and (some?) simulators... perhaps it is this 3rd party middleware that needs/could be updated? i dunno... i just use Phi's map and don't know why i would need or want LNM at all...
Robertfm wrote in Thu Oct 17, 2019 8:03 pm:Johan G wrote in Thu Oct 17, 2019 6:47 pm:Took the liberty to merge the two topics. Also moved the topic.
Is that why I got a message saying I was authorised to access; Connecting to LittleNavMap
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests