Erik Hofman wrote: > Okay, here's my view. > > I've spent numurous hours of work into FlightGear (sometimes even almost > as a day job) not only for the fun of it, but also because it's Free > (for everyone). The fun would stop for me if I noticed my work ens up in > a commercial application as an easy way to make money. You don't want to > know how much time I've spent creating the F-16 configuration file and > some of the texture (realy, you don't). > > That said, if the product will clearly state it's based on FLightGear > _and_ provided the URL to the website, I'm willing to accept almost > anything because that assures me there won't be any commercial > compettitor which directly affects FlightGear. > > For instance, if there ever will be a sailing simulator based on large > parts of FLightGear, I would have no obligations because it doesn't > affect FlightGear itself. However, if for example the textures end up > included in a commercial flight simulator just because it saves them > time, I will strongly disagree. > > On the other hand, if one or more of the active FlightGear developers > get the opportunity to spent their life developing FlightGear that way > (which *is* a donation to FlightGear if you ask me) I would have no > obligations at all. > > Erik
Erik, I don't think there's any movement to change the license on the base package. I believe this discussion is on moving useful code routines from fg to sg, to make simgear a more useful and attractive platform. --Brandon Bergren _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
