On Mon, 27 Jan 2003 20:28:38 +1100, 
"Mathew McBride" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message 

>  Basically they are making this protocol proprietary so no one can
>  develop crap clients.

...and in the process, _junks_ any and all open source licensed "crap" 
linux and unix developers experience and skill and codebase, for good.

>  I wish to send a joint letter (on behalf on the FGFS community and
>  me) to the ProtoDev Development group as a request to open up the FSD
>  protocol. What are they talking about security. Hey, anyone can get
>  access to the protocol docs of the MSN, ICQ and (especially) Jabber
>  IM networks, and to a whole lot more protocols.

..uhmmm, agreed, however _also_ chk each document's license terms, 
some _are_ draconian.  ;-)

>  If this fails, I will either :
>  a) reverse engineer the protocol. Considering trying to block any
>  clients I develop based on my work will be hard
>  b) create a brand new one.

..I like b), harder to prove it as pirated, if it _aint_.  ;-)

>  I wish to collect as many views and names I can. DO NOT send
>  messenges personally to the representatives above. Send them to my
>  address with "[FSD petition]" somewhere in the subject line.

..futile if you wanna keep this an unrecorded secret, reasonable and
right if you wanna win them over to the open source way of doing things.
FG mail list archives are available online to prove it.

>  Remember: FlightGear has no agent to communicate with other Flight

..no?  ;-)

>  Sim's. If we developed a FSD client, I _swear_ some interest will
>  come to FlightGear.


..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt... ;-)
...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.

Flightgear-devel mailing list

Reply via email to