> From: Tim Moore [mailto:timo...@redhat.com]
> Doubtful. > > We can't say that "all the models in the repository are covered by the GPL" and > have models in there that are not. This is a terrible trap for anyone wanting to > use FlightGear in any professional setting. > > We should consider why we want FlightGear and its models to be under the GPL in > the first place. I suggest that we do because it's a very well known license > that nicely balances the contributors' desire to give something to the community > and at the same time not have their work be unfairly exploited. > > For the aircraft models, there are 3 not-very-attractive choices: > > * Don't say the aircraft are GPL'ed. "Models are under any random license; > seller beware." Yuck. > * Rip out the non-GPLed models. > * Create GPL'ed and "other" aircraft repositories. > > Tim Well, it's important to remember that one of the key advantages of having a generic flight model and simulator itself is that these can be used for modeling aircraft which are not intended to be released. Aircraft models *can* be created which are not only *not* GPL, but proprietary, or even classified. The second and third options that you list, above, may be needed. Jon ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This SF.net email is sponsored by: SourcForge Community SourceForge wants to tell your story. http://p.sf.net/sfu/sf-spreadtheword _______________________________________________ Flightgear-devel mailing list Flightgear-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/flightgear-devel
