Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 21:38:18 -0500, Chris wrote in message 1296095898.27791.1.camel@chrison-Aspire-5741G: On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 23:41 -0700, jac...@lfstech.com wrote: How about a show of hands? Is there enough interest and volunteers to organize a team to tackle the problem? As I said in my original post, I'm not a programmer so, unfortunately, I couldn't help in that regard. However, I'd be willing to help as an end-user/tester. Regards, Chris ..and, you are able to hire a Vatsim programmer to do the job for you, you then own the work because you hired someone to do it for you, therefore you can license your end product any darn way you please. Now, if you hired man signs that NDA after you hire him, chances are you will be bound by that NDA because the reasonable assumption will suggest he did it on your behalf to do the job you hired him to do. ..now, if you can find somebody who has already signed Vatsim's NDA, you are then able to hire them to do the job _without_ disclosing any Vatsim IP to you, it's all in how you, or your lawyer ;o) defines the job. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Chris, I think the benefit of having sort of a VATSIM-interface or -bridge for FlightGear is pretty much unquestioned, therefore I'll leave these details out. The point is a completely different one and probably consist of just two simple parts: 1.) Like probably almost every other OpenSource projects, FlightGear attracts its developer crowd (some would call it community) by the features which are specific to OpenSource development in general: Free access to the source code, multiple people working more or less collaboratively on the same part/feature, shared responsibility and certainly a lot more. This is fundamentally different from the development model you'd be forced into after signing an NDA: The NDA would presumably make almost every flavour of collaboration and peer-review impossible and the respective developer would end up as the sole responsible person for interfacing a variety of different FlightGear versions on a colourful bouquet of different platforms. Doesn't sound too attractive Chris O'Neill wrote: Correct me if I'm wrong, but what VATSIM seems to be saying is that they don't want just anybody trying to connect to their network, hence the only approved clients policy, and in order to enforce that policy they want to be the only source for releasing the source code. As far as I can tell the we need to protect our sim network is void. If they really make this claim, I'd consider it as a specious argument. To put it into different words: I know of at least three distinct implementations of VATSIM network protocols which had been created without VATSIM's help by reverse engineering. Thus, if anyone is seriously interested in compromising their network, there are sufficient opportunities to do so. One of the three people who reverse-engineered VATSIM-protocols was saying in a joke that he suspected the main reason for VATSIM to keep their protocol secret was not to disclose how poorly designed it is :-) Cheers, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:56:41 + (UTC), Martin wrote in message ihor4p$ls0k$1...@osprey.mgras.de: Chris, I think the benefit of having sort of a VATSIM-interface or -bridge for FlightGear is pretty much unquestioned, therefore I'll leave these details out. The point is a completely different one and probably consist of just two simple parts: 1.) Like probably almost every other OpenSource projects, FlightGear attracts its developer crowd (some would call it community) by the features which are specific to OpenSource development in general: Free access to the source code, multiple people working more or less collaboratively on the same part/feature, shared responsibility and certainly a lot more. This is fundamentally different from the development model you'd be forced into after signing an NDA: The NDA would presumably make almost every flavour of collaboration and peer-review impossible and the respective developer would end up as the sole responsible person for interfacing a variety of different FlightGear versions on a colourful bouquet of different platforms. Doesn't sound too attractive ..and then there is the litigation risk, if you don't read nor sign any NDA, you can not violate that agreement. ..if you do sign a NDA, you risk having to hire an expensive contract law lawyer to try convince a pro-business judge that you the progressive pro-community hobbyist hacker did not do what that big business law team _claims_ you did. ..http://groklaw.net/ has _several_ such stories, where even Big Blue has been stuck for over 7 years in US courts. -- ..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen ...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry... Scenarios always come in sets of three: best case, worst case, and just in case. -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 23:41 -0700, jac...@lfstech.com wrote: How about a show of hands? Is there enough interest and volunteers to organize a team to tackle the problem? As I said in my original post, I'm not a programmer so, unfortunately, I couldn't help in that regard. However, I'd be willing to help as an end-user/tester. Regards, Chris -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
[PREFACE: I'm a FG end-user who's not a programmer, nor am I an intellectual property rights attorney. My sole desire is to use FG as a realistic flight similator, as opposed to using it as a fun game. Please consider the remarks below in that context. Thanks!] On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 19:15 -0300, Victhor wrote: VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues. I'll get to this in a moment, but first... It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure. Just to be clear, sb747 hasn't been fixed to report the proper aircraft but, rather, a workaround has been found whereby you file your flight plan via simroutes.com and then once that's done you file a blank flight plan with sb747. Since your simroutes.com flight plan contains the aircraft type, that's what is reported on VATSIM, Now, back to the whole licensing/NDA issue... IMHO, and with all due respect to those who might disagree, while the ideal would be that an FG--VATSIM broker (to use VATSIM's term) would be open source, I do not understand why this has to be mandatory? If VATSIM were saying that FG itself had to become closed-source for it to connect to their network, then I'd be in total agreement. However, that's NOT the case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what VATSIM seems to be saying is that they don't want just anybody trying to connect to their network, hence the only approved clients policy, and in order to enforce that policy they want to be the only source for releasing the source code. I'm not aware of them wanting to extract licensing fees (i.e. earn income) for access to the source code (right?), and it seems to me they're merely trying to protect the integrity of their network. Is that so wrong? What we have here is an opportunity to take FG to a whole new level, and I'd *really* hate to see that opportunity rejected out-of-hand over this issue. We say on one hand that FG is a serious flight simulation environment (as opposed to merely being a game) and, yet, when presented with the possibility of linking FG to a serious air traffic controlled online flying environment we immediately reject the idea because a client to connect to that environment would not be open source? IMHO, the FG multiplayer environment will *never* match the realism and professionalism of air traffic controlled online flying that VATSIM has achieved. Yes, we have a handful of MP ATC's (jomo, redneck, wookierabbit, and a few others), and those folks do a *fabulous* job. But they're just a handful, and those of us who are seriously flying under their direction are often overwhelmed by gamers who spawn into MP on the runways, ignore ATC directions, and otherwise disrupt (either accidentally or purposely) our efforts to mimick real-life flying under ATC control. By comparison VATSIM has *hundreds* of ATC's who must pass rigid certification requirements before they go to work on the network. VATSIM requires those who access the network to follow ATC directions, and failing to do so will get you booted from that network pretty quickly. It's possible on VATSIM to fly across North America, or even transatlantic, and do the whole flight (including clearance and ground control) under air traffic control the entire time, while being passed to multiple controllers in the process. I have listened to real-life ATC comms on liveatc.net and I have flown FG on VATSIM and, frankly, it's pretty hard to tell the difference between the two. So, while some of us may not like the idea of having to sign an NDA in order to develop an FG--VATSIM broker/client, the simple fact of the matter is this... those of us who want to use FlightGear to fly online in a realistic and professional air traffic controlled environment *can't* currently do that in MP (and, IMHO, likely never will be able to do it), but we *can* do it in VATSIM. In closing, the squawkgear/sb747 solution is an exceptional hack that does work, but if we *really* want to get serious about providing FG users with the capability of using FG as a serious flight simulation environment, then IMHO we should give this a serious look. Regards, Chris -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
HI Chris, Here are a couple quick comment in reply ... My sense is that there are very few people who would outright oppose a vatsim interface to flightgear. I think most people would consider this is a good thing. Here is my question/concern. If some developer gets approved by vatsim and signs the appropriate NDA's and then builds an interface from vatsim to flightgear, then sure, that could be an external closed source application that bridges the communication gap between FlightGear and VATSIM. But here's the problem. Now anyone (good or evil) has a wide open, public, unsecured route into the vatsim network. The flightgear API's are open and you can inspect all the code and structures. So anyone could take the vatsim-flightgear interface and leverage it to interject any kind of nonsense into the vatsim network. This is exactly what vatsim is trying to avoid by protecting their communication protocols. As soon as they allow a translator to be written with an open/published/documented protocol at the other end ... this is the very next best thing for someone wanting to do mischief. Please notice: this isn't me being negative about vatsim, or being negative about the idea of a vatsim interface for flightgear. I'd personally love to have it available one way or another. But I'm trying to place myself in the perspective of what the vatsim folks would think. Hopefully I'm way wrong, but if we lay it all out for them open and honestly up front so we aren't trying to sneak something past them, what do you think they would say? FlightGear doesn't have a binary plug in system so it's not possible for someone to write a closed source plugin to implement the vatsim protocol. It would have to be done as an entirely open-source module within FlightGear, or as an entirely separate external application that communicates with flightgear through some network protocol. So all that said, here's one more thing to ponder. FlightGear is a volunteer driven project. The people that pitch in and do the work get to decide what they will work on and how they will do it. We can discuss vatsim back and forth all day long, but until a volunteer steps forward who's willing (and able) to build the vatsim interface to flightgear, and who is willing to sign all the vatsim nda's, and who is willing to do whatever discussion and negotiation and strategizing and design work that is required to make the system function satisfactorily from the perspective of both vatsim and flightgear ... until such a person emerges, really all we can do is talk about it theoretically. Best regards, Curt. On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Chris O'Neill wrote: [PREFACE: I'm a FG end-user who's not a programmer, nor am I an intellectual property rights attorney. My sole desire is to use FG as a realistic flight similator, as opposed to using it as a fun game. Please consider the remarks below in that context. Thanks!] On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 19:15 -0300, Victhor wrote: VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues. I'll get to this in a moment, but first... It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure. Just to be clear, sb747 hasn't been fixed to report the proper aircraft but, rather, a workaround has been found whereby you file your flight plan via simroutes.com and then once that's done you file a blank flight plan with sb747. Since your simroutes.com flight plan contains the aircraft type, that's what is reported on VATSIM, Now, back to the whole licensing/NDA issue... IMHO, and with all due respect to those who might disagree, while the ideal would be that an FG--VATSIM broker (to use VATSIM's term) would be open source, I do not understand why this has to be mandatory? If VATSIM were saying that FG itself had to become closed-source for it to connect to their network, then I'd be in total agreement. However, that's NOT the case. Correct me if I'm wrong, but what VATSIM seems to be saying is that they don't want just anybody trying to connect to their network, hence the only approved clients policy, and in order to enforce that policy they want to be the only source for releasing the source code. I'm not aware of them wanting to extract licensing fees (i.e. earn income) for access to the source code (right?), and it seems to me they're merely trying to protect the integrity of their network. Is that so wrong? What we have here is an opportunity to take FG to a whole new level, and I'd *really* hate to see that opportunity rejected out-of-hand over this issue. We say on one hand that FG is a serious flight simulation environment (as opposed to merely being a game) and, yet, when presented with the possibility of
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Hi, Hmmm, I would take it one step further... You write and operate an FG/VATSIM server running on a dedicated machine(s) and publish the FG open source interface and protocol. The VATSIM side and source in the server is closed and operates with an approved NDA. Anyone may join from the FG side with any approved user name and password and connect to the VATSIM world. Users would be governed by the same rules for flight operations as defined by the VATSIM procedures and regulations. Intentionally violate the rules -- first offense; a warning, 2nd offense; banishment -- go play with the kiddies. Just as an aside, last year the MITRE corporation ( where I had the pleasure of a short stint from Northrop ) conducted a study on runway incursions ( see http://forums.vatsim.net/viewtopic.php?f=78t=51419 ) using VATSIM and FSX. ATM I need to keep my calendar free for a possible contract to build a 737NG FTD that will be FAA certified a Jack HI Chris, Here are a couple quick comment in reply ... My sense is that there are very few people who would outright oppose a vatsim interface to flightgear. I think most people would consider this is a good thing. Here is my question/concern. If some developer gets approved by vatsim and signs the appropriate NDA's and then builds an interface from vatsim to flightgear, then sure, that could be an external closed source application that bridges the communication gap between FlightGear and VATSIM. But here's the problem. Now anyone (good or evil) has a wide open, public, unsecured route into the vatsim network. The flightgear API's are open and you can inspect all the code and structures. So anyone could take the vatsim-flightgear interface and leverage it to interject any kind of nonsense into the vatsim network. This is exactly what vatsim is trying to avoid by protecting their communication protocols. As soon as they allow a translator to be written with an open/published/documented protocol at the other end ... this is the very next best thing for someone wanting to do mischief. Please notice: this isn't me being negative about vatsim, or being negative about the idea of a vatsim interface for flightgear. I'd personally love to have it available one way or another. But I'm trying to place myself in the perspective of what the vatsim folks would think. Hopefully I'm way wrong, but if we lay it all out for them open and honestly up front so we aren't trying to sneak something past them, what do you think they would say? FlightGear doesn't have a binary plug in system so it's not possible for someone to write a closed source plugin to implement the vatsim protocol. It would have to be done as an entirely open-source module within FlightGear, or as an entirely separate external application that communicates with flightgear through some network protocol. So all that said, here's one more thing to ponder. FlightGear is a volunteer driven project. The people that pitch in and do the work get to decide what they will work on and how they will do it. We can discuss vatsim back and forth all day long, but until a volunteer steps forward who's willing (and able) to build the vatsim interface to flightgear, and who is willing to sign all the vatsim nda's, and who is willing to do whatever discussion and negotiation and strategizing and design work that is required to make the system function satisfactorily from the perspective of both vatsim and flightgear ... until such a person emerges, really all we can do is talk about it theoretically. Best regards, Curt. On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Chris O'Neill wrote: [PREFACE: I'm a FG end-user who's not a programmer, nor am I an intellectual property rights attorney. My sole desire is to use FG as a realistic flight similator, as opposed to using it as a fun game. Please consider the remarks below in that context. Thanks!] On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 19:15 -0300, Victhor wrote: VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues. I'll get to this in a moment, but first... It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure. Just to be clear, sb747 hasn't been fixed to report the proper aircraft but, rather, a workaround has been found whereby you file your flight plan via simroutes.com and then once that's done you file a blank flight plan with sb747. Since your simroutes.com flight plan contains the aircraft type, that's what is reported on VATSIM, Now, back to the whole licensing/NDA issue... IMHO, and with all due respect to those who might disagree, while the ideal would be that an FG--VATSIM broker (to use VATSIM's term) would be open source, I do not understand why this has to be mandatory? If VATSIM
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
NUTS!! was working on a draft and hit send by accident. to finish my comments. waiting on word for a proposal to build a 737NG FTD certified by FAA at Level 5. Should know within the next few weeks, hopefully. That wil wipe me out for the next six months, but can still find some time to get the ball rolling with the VATSIM folks. How about a show of hands? Is there enough interest and volunteers to organize a team to tackle the problem? I can provide a dedicated machine and IP address to host the server and possibly a T1 line. Jack Original Message Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?From: Curtis Olson curtol...@gmail.comDate: Tue, January 25, 2011 10:26 pmTo: chrison...@yahoo.ca, FlightGear developers discussionsflightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.netHI Chris, Here are a couple quick comment in reply ... My sense is that there are very few people who would outright oppose a vatsim interface to flightgear. I think most people would consider this is a good thing. Here is my question/concern. If some developer gets approved by vatsim and signs the appropriate NDA's and then builds an interface from vatsim to flightgear, then sure, that could be an external "closed source" application that bridges the communication gap between FlightGear and VATSIM. But here's the problem. Now anyone (good or evil) has a wide open, public, unsecured route into the vatsim network. The flightgear API's are open and you can inspect all the code and structures. So anyone could take the vatsim-flightgear interface and leverage it to interject any kind of nonsense into the vatsim network. This is exactly what vatsim is trying to avoid by protecting their communication protocols. As soon as they allow a translator to be written with an open/published/documented protocol at the other end ... this is the very next best thing for someone wanting to do mischief. Please notice: this isn't me being negative about vatsim, or being negative about the idea of a vatsim interface for flightgear. I'd personally love to have it available one way or another. But I'm trying to place myself in the perspective of what the vatsim folks would think. Hopefully I'm way wrong, but if we lay it all out for them open and honestly up front so we aren't trying to sneak something past them, what do you think they would say? FlightGear doesn't have a binary plug in system so it's not possible for someone to write a closed source plugin to implement the vatsim protocol. It would have to be done as an entirely open-source module within FlightGear, or as an entirely separate external application that communicates with flightgear through some network protocol. So all that said, here's one more thing to ponder. FlightGear is a volunteer driven project. Thepeoplethat pitch in and do the work get to decide what they will work on and how they will do it. We can discuss vatsim back and forth all day long, but until a volunteer steps forward who's willing (and able) to build the vatsim interface to flightgear, and who is willing to sign all the vatsim nda's, and who is willing to do whatever discussion and negotiation and strategizing and design work that is required to make the system function satisfactorily from the perspective of both vatsim and flightgear ... until such a person emerges, really all we can do is talk about it theoretically. Best regards, Curt. On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Chris O'Neill wrote: [PREFACE: I'm a FG end-user who's not a programmer, nor am I anintellectual property rights attorney. My sole desire is to use FG as a"realistic" flight similator, as opposed to using it as a fun "game."Please consider the remarks below in that context. Thanks!] On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 19:15 -0300, Victhor wrote: VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues.I'll get to this in a moment, but first... It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure.Just to be clear, sb747 hasn't been "fixed" to report the properaircraft but, rather, a workaround has been found whereby you file yourflight plan via simroutes.com and then once that's done you file a blankflight plan with sb747. Since your simroutes.com flight plan containsthe aircraft type, that's what is reported on VATSIM,Now, back to the whole licensing/NDA issue...IMHO, and with all due respect to those who might disagree, while the"ideal" would be that an FG--VATSIM "broker" (to use VATSIM's term)would be open source, I do not understand why this has to be mandatory?If VATSIM were saying that FG itself had to become closed-source for itto connect to their network, then I'd be in total agreement. However,that's NOT the case.Correct me if I'm wron
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues. It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure. Both(SB747 and SquawkGear) work under wine iirc. On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM, jack.w wrote: Looking over the wiki page and info. Is Sb747 and AVC limited to MS windows based machines? Or is there a Linux version as well? Is source available? Only the sources of Reed's FlightGear interface (SquawkGear) is available, but not those of SquakBox (SB747) aren't - due to licensing issues with VATSIM. At least the author says he has promised VATSIM not to disclose the sources. What's worse, SB747 is no longer maintained. It works for now as it is, but has several drawbacks: apart from not being open source, it annoyingly always reports a 747 aircraft to VATSIM. So even if you flew an Airbus or a small Cessna on FlightGear - you'll show up as a 747 on VATSIM. And yes, SB747 is Windows only. People running normal Linux or some obscure platform (such as Macs :-b ) need to run the Windows software in a virtual machine - or use Wine. Both works. Yes, it'd be great if there was an open source FG adapter to VATSIM - it could also be a single utility then and a lot easier to install. But I guess that's not going to happen too soon. cheers, Thorsten -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
I suppose most of the people here aren't willing to sign a NDA to code something... I wouldn't be willing to do that if I could code. I would like to have atleast native binary-only program instead of running it through wine, since there isn't any other way, but that's only me :) 2011/1/20 Victhor victhor.fos...@gmail.com: VATSIM requires any developer to sign a NDA before having access to their network, so it's not possible to make a open source client. SB747 was made before the NDA requirement, but I suppose sources can't be released due to obvious licensing issues. It seems it has been fixed so that it reports you as the aircraft you're currently using, but I'm not sure. Both(SB747 and SquawkGear) work under wine iirc. On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM, jack.w wrote: Looking over the wiki page and info. Is Sb747 and AVC limited to MS windows based machines? Or is there a Linux version as well? Is source available? Only the sources of Reed's FlightGear interface (SquawkGear) is available, but not those of SquakBox (SB747) aren't - due to licensing issues with VATSIM. At least the author says he has promised VATSIM not to disclose the sources. What's worse, SB747 is no longer maintained. It works for now as it is, but has several drawbacks: apart from not being open source, it annoyingly always reports a 747 aircraft to VATSIM. So even if you flew an Airbus or a small Cessna on FlightGear - you'll show up as a 747 on VATSIM. And yes, SB747 is Windows only. People running normal Linux or some obscure platform (such as Macs :-b ) need to run the Windows software in a virtual machine - or use Wine. Both works. Yes, it'd be great if there was an open source FG adapter to VATSIM - it could also be a single utility then and a lot easier to install. But I guess that's not going to happen too soon. cheers, Thorsten -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Victhor victhor.fos...@gmail.com wrote: I suppose most of the people here aren't willing to sign a NDA to code something... I wouldn't be willing to do that if I could code. Not only that, but I personally don't even want to join or support an organization that requires NDA and plays silly corporate games instead of openly welcoming new arrivals. But that's just me. -- Csaba/Jester -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Sat, 22 Jan 2011, Csaba Halász wrote: On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Victhor victhor.fos...@gmail.com wrote: I suppose most of the people here aren't willing to sign a NDA to code something... I wouldn't be willing to do that if I could code. Not only that, but I personally don't even want to join or support an organization that requires NDA and plays silly corporate games instead of openly welcoming new arrivals. But that's just me. I doubt it has anything to do with that Csaba. AFAIK, their primary concern is with griefers ruining the network for others. g. -- Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007 http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind. http://www.simpits.org/geneb - The Me-109F/X Project ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes. http://www.scarletdme.org - Get it _today_! Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.-- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 10:50 AM, Gene Buckle wrote: I doubt it has anything to do with that Csaba. AFAIK, their primary concern is with griefers ruining the network for others. Here's the problem as I see it. Any FlightGear interface will necessarily have a closed source interface to the Vatsim network implemented by a developer who signed a NDA, and simultaneously it will implement an open public interface to FlightGear. Suddenly we have opened an public api translater for the vatsim network that anyone could exploit for ill. Better than hiding the API details (because some enterprising person could probably reverse engineer that pretty easily anyway by inspecting the network packets) would be to have some sort of encrypted/authenticated prototcol (similar to ssh). Then the protocol can be totally open, but without proper authentication you are unable to participate. But I'm guessing that vatsim won't be all that interested in redesigning their entire protocol and rewriting every plugin for every sim out there, just because I had a good idea. ;-) Curt. -- Curtis Olson: http://www.atiak.com - http://aem.umn.edu/~uav/ http://www.flightgear.org - http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/curt/http://www.flightgear.org/blogs/category/personal/curt/ -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Csaba Halász wrote: Not only that, but I personally don't even want to join or support an organization that requires NDA and plays silly corporate games instead of openly welcoming new arrivals. But that's just me. No, not just you, count me in, Martin. -- Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are ! -- -- Special Offer-- Download ArcSight Logger for FREE (a $49 USD value)! Finally, a world-class log management solution at an even better price-free! Download using promo code Free_Logger_4_Dev2Dev. Offer expires February 28th, so secure your free ArcSight Logger TODAY! http://p.sf.net/sfu/arcsight-sfd2d ___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Looking over the wiki page and info. Is Sb747 and AVC limited to MS windows based machines? Or is there a Linux version as well? Is source available? Last email on the FG forum from reeed was dated Apr 05, 2010. John Original Message Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?From: ThorstenB bre...@gmail.comDate: Sat, January 15, 2011 9:20 amTo: FlightGear developers discussionsflightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, jack.w wrote: Is this a feature in the latest git version? There have been discussions over the years on hooking into the IVAO and VATSIM communities. Was not aware that the connection had been made. Giving a talk in March at UC Davis on using FlightGear in my full scale 747 sim and Linux. Would like to include a few words on this feature. Could someone point me to the relevant code or any writeups or discussions on the topicThis is not a feature of FlightGear itself, but a separate utility/setup that makes the connection (via SquawkGear and SquawkBox - the latter provides the actual (and approved) VATSIM interface). I've also tested it - and, yes, indeed it works.To get started:http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/SquawkGear -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 10:41 PM, jack.w wrote: Looking over the wiki page and info. Is Sb747 and AVC limited to MS windows based machines? Or is there a Linux version as well? Is source available? Only the sources of Reed's FlightGear interface (SquawkGear) is available, but not those of SquakBox (SB747) aren't - due to licensing issues with VATSIM. At least the author says he has promised VATSIM not to disclose the sources. What's worse, SB747 is no longer maintained. It works for now as it is, but has several drawbacks: apart from not being open source, it annoyingly always reports a 747 aircraft to VATSIM. So even if you flew an Airbus or a small Cessna on FlightGear - you'll show up as a 747 on VATSIM. And yes, SB747 is Windows only. People running normal Linux or some obscure platform (such as Macs :-b ) need to run the Windows software in a virtual machine - or use Wine. Both works. Yes, it'd be great if there was an open source FG adapter to VATSIM - it could also be a single utility then and a lot easier to install. But I guess that's not going to happen too soon. cheers, Thorsten -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
[Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Hi, I noiced in a recent post by Gijs de Rooy on the scammers a commnet that FG now had VATSIM support. Interesting and nice.! Is this a feature in the latest git version? There have been discussions over the years on hooking into the IVAO and VATSIM communities. Was not aware that the connection had been made. Giving a talk in March at UC Davis on using FlightGear in my full scale 747 sim and Linux. Would like to include a few words on this feature. Could someone point me to the relevant code or any writeups or discussions on the topic Thanks Jack W. -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, jack.w wrote: Is this a feature in the latest git version? There have been discussions over the years on hooking into the IVAO and VATSIM communities. Was not aware that the connection had been made. Giving a talk in March at UC Davis on using FlightGear in my full scale 747 sim and Linux. Would like to include a few words on this feature. Could someone point me to the relevant code or any writeups or discussions on the topic This is not a feature of FlightGear itself, but a separate utility/setup that makes the connection (via SquawkGear and SquawkBox - the latter provides the actual (and approved) VATSIM interface). I've also tested it - and, yes, indeed it works. To get started: http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/SquawkGear cheers, Thorsten -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?
Neat! :-) Thank you for the info andquick reply. Will give it a try Jack Original Message Subject: Re: [Flightgear-devel] VATSIM support?From: ThorstenB bre...@gmail.comDate: Sat, January 15, 2011 9:20 amTo: FlightGear developers discussionsflightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On Sat, Jan 15, 2011 at 4:39 PM, jack.w wrote: Is this a feature in the latest git version? There have been discussions over the years on hooking into the IVAO and VATSIM communities. Was not aware that the connection had been made. Giving a talk in March at UC Davis on using FlightGear in my full scale 747 sim and Linux. Would like to include a few words on this feature. Could someone point me to the relevant code or any writeups or discussions on the topicThis is not a feature of FlightGear itself, but a separate utility/setup that makes the connection (via SquawkGear and SquawkBox - the latter provides the actual (and approved) VATSIM interface). I've also tested it - and, yes, indeed it works.To get started:http://wiki.flightgear.org/index.php/SquawkGearcheers,Thorsten --Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware AttacksLearn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing.http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl ___Flightgear-devel mailing listFlightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.nethttps://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel -- Protect Your Site and Customers from Malware Attacks Learn about various malware tactics and how to avoid them. Understand malware threats, the impact they can have on your business, and how you can protect your company and customers by using code signing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/oracle-sfdevnl___ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
