Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-07-08 Thread Mathias Fröhlich
Hi, So sorry for the long delay. On Wednesday 01 July 2009 16:29:23 Petr Gotthard wrote: The basic HLA standard (both DoD and IEEE variant) provides only a C++ API compatibility at a compile-level. There is a SISO standard that should assure dynamic link compatibility (DLC). However, some

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-07-01 Thread Petr Gotthard
Hi Mathias, Thank you very much for your comments. So, as far as I knor HLA/RTI, your problem is divided in two parts: 1. The problem with different RTI implementation libraries. 2. The problem with different fom's Regarding the RTI libs: As far as I can see the RTI c++ interface is defined

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-07-01 Thread Petr Gotthard
Hi, I'm (still) against binary runtime modules for FlightGear. And I respect that. We offer more possibilities than X-plane and MSFS and all the others put together -- by letting people look at/modify/redistribute our source code. For free. That's very generous, if you ask me. Yes, that is

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-06-26 Thread Petr Gotthard
Petr Gotthard wrote: To follow the do things right rule I think it would be great to implement a generic interface for standalone I/O modules. Both Micro$oft FSX and X-Plane have such interface. The MS HLA users would just need to build a shared module (.dll or .so) for a particular HLA RTI

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-06-26 Thread Erik Hofman
Petr Gotthard wrote: Let me advocate the idea: I'm proposing a generic interface. If you look from the other side, it's a possibility to easily implement a new I/O module for FlightGear. To help people that might be interested to extend FlightGear but do not want to recompile the whole

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-06-26 Thread Gene Buckle
All valid points but irrelevant for the GPL. It is already possible to connect proprietary software to FlightGear using the generic binary (socket) protocol handler, but that doesn't violate the GPL. Plug-in interfaces tend to do because they are considered 'part of the program' by the GPL.

Re: [Flightgear-devel] [RFC] Dynamic plug-in interface for I/Omodules

2009-06-26 Thread Petr Gotthard
All valid points but irrelevant for the GPL. It is already possible to connect proprietary software to FlightGear using the generic binary (socket) protocol handler, but that doesn't violate the GPL. Plug-in interfaces tend to do because they are considered 'part of the program' by the GPL.