Orbiter-Forum  

Go Back   Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Requests
Register Blogs Orbinauts List Social Groups FAQ Projects Mark Forums Read

Addon Requests If you have a request for a new addon or want to know where to find a specific addon, ask it here!

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 02-05-2018, 06:12 AM   #16
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gattispilot View Post
 Well there was this;
https://www.orbithangar.com/searchid.php?ID=5525

But I think you run into sharing them.
If these textures are derived work from the SSU project content, it will fall under GPL. IMHO it would mean that you can share them as long as your project's license is GPL compatible, too.

However, there are people in this community that think that the GPL license is not applicable to Orbiter addons, or that you can't distribute such addons legally. These thoughts were discussed, but besides hearing both sides of the argument, no clear-cut community standing emerged. Martin Schweiger himself has no problems with GPL addons, as it seems.

So I'd suggest to keep your hands off of it. Not worth the trouble.

Last edited by Face; 02-05-2018 at 06:26 AM.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 06:55 AM   #17
Thorsten
Orbinaut
 
Thorsten's Avatar
Default

Quote:
If these textures are derived work from the SSU project content, it will fall under GPL.
I believe SSU is LGPL - which is significantly more permissive as far as derived work is concerned (i.e. does not force you to license derived work GPL).

Quote:
I have STS textures. Not sure where /or who did them.
Echoing what Face said before - that's a big 'do not re-distribute' then.
Thorsten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 06:56 AM   #18
DaveS
Addon Developer
 
DaveS's Avatar


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorsten View Post
 I believe SSU is LGPL - which is significantly more permissive as far as derived work is concerned (i.e. does not force you to license derived work GPL).
https://sourceforge.net/projects/shuttleultra/
DaveS is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 09:09 AM   #19
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveS View Post
Well, I'm confused now.

That link states that it is LGPL, but everything in the code shows that it is GPL. The history of the code back to the first Ultra commit (2008) also demonstrates GPL, not LGPL. From what I know, the SSU project was always proclaimed to be GPL. The addon in question is pretty old, according to OHM from 2011, a time where SSU certainly was still deemed GPL. IANAL, but that's not a very solid situation IMHO.

My suggestion still stands: hands off.

---------- Post added at 09:15 ---------- Previous post was at 09:01 ----------

Just checked the history some more, and there is one commit by Urwumpe with the comment "Created standard LGPL comments for the header files, for being legally on the safe side and preparing for the next release." from 2009-04-17 23:56:34, where the Atlantis.h file gets the following header:
Code:
/****************************************************************************
  This file is part of Space Shuttle Ultra

  STS Orbiter vessel class definition



  Space Shuttle Ultra is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
  it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
  the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
  (at your option) any later version.

  Space Shuttle Ultra is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
  but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
  MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the
  GNU General Public License for more details.

  You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
  along with Space Shuttle Ultra; if not, write to the Free Software
  Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA  02111-1307  USA

  See http://spaceshuttleultra.sourceforge.net/license/ for more details.

  **************************************************************************/

//Original copyright notice of Atlantis example
// ==============================================================
//                 ORBITER MODULE: Atlantis
//                  Part of the ORBITER SDK
//          Copyright (C) 2001-2003 Martin Schweiger
//                   All rights reserved
//
// Atlantis.h
// Class interface of Atlantis (Space Shuttle) vessel class
// module and associated subclasses (SRB, tank)
// ==============================================================
WTF? The link (for more details) is not working anymore, BTW.

---------- Post added at 10:09 ---------- Previous post was at 09:15 ----------

The included documentation also states the following:
Quote:
Originally Posted by /Doc/Space Shuttle Ultra/SSU Ops Manual V5.0.pdf, last page
 This addon is open-source and is released under the GNU GPL.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Old 02-05-2018, 10:06 AM   #20
GLS
Addon Developer
 
GLS's Avatar
Default

I'm not a lawyer, but the header seems to say GPL and not LGPL... I predict a nice afternoon for me...
As for the link, I can't fix that... I think (of the people still around) that only Urwumpe as "full access" to SF.

One question I had for some time: should that header be in all source and header files, or its "enough" to have it only in the header files?
GLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 10:30 AM   #21
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
 I'm not a lawyer, but the header seems to say GPL and not LGPL... I predict a nice afternoon for me...
As for the link, I can't fix that... I think (of the people still around) that only Urwumpe as "full access" to SF.

One question I had for some time: should that header be in all source and header files, or its "enough" to have it only in the header files?
I don't think it is necessary to hurry here. I just mentioned it because it is obviously inconsistent and might lead to misunderstandings.

I guess it would be good to at least have all links say the same thing. Since it looks like GPL from the get-go, the SourceForge link should be changed to say so too, at least for the time you need to get all contributors to agree to change it to LGPL. If you have that agreement, I'd suggest to first remove the headers, then change the doc entries to LGPL, then gradually add the headers again with updated license. I don't think there is a common formalism on whether or not there needs to be a header in all sources. Well, besides from FSF, maybe.

As I see it, nobody really has a problem with it, though. It is just confusing a bit.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 10:59 AM   #22
GLS
Addon Developer
 
GLS's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 I don't think it is necessary to hurry here. I just mentioned it because it is obviously inconsistent and might lead to misunderstandings.

I guess it would be good to at least have all links say the same thing. Since it looks like GPL from the get-go, the SourceForge link should be changed to say so too, at least for the time you need to get all contributors to agree to change it to LGPL. If you have that agreement, I'd suggest to first remove the headers, then change the doc entries to LGPL, then gradually add the headers again with updated license. I don't think there is a common formalism on whether or not there needs to be a header in all sources. Well, besides from FSF, maybe.

As I see it, nobody really has a problem with it, though. It is just confusing a bit.
Any reason why the header replacement has/should be gradual?
(if the mods feel this is going (way) off-topic, this discussion could be moved to the SSU dev thread)
GLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 11:19 AM   #23
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
 Any reason why the header replacement has/should be gradual?
(if the mods feel this is going (way) off-topic, this discussion could be moved to the SSU dev thread)
No, it is no requirement to do so, of course. I just suggested it because it is easier for the developers to add headers on the go. I.e. you have the comfort of the general license statement as fallback, and whenever you touch a source file, you check for header.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 11:31 AM   #24
Urwumpe
Certain Super User
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Face View Post
 However, there are people in this community that think that the GPL license is not applicable to Orbiter addons, or that you can't distribute such addons legally. These thoughts were discussed, but besides hearing both sides of the argument, no clear-cut community standing emerged. Martin Schweiger himself has no problems with GPL addons, as it seems.
Sadly I am not allowed to solve this case of "pseudo law" by using traditional conservative legal means. A Trial of Grievance could be considered murder in some legislations.

---------- Post added at 12:31 ---------- Previous post was at 12:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
 As for the link, I can't fix that... I think (of the people still around) that only Urwumpe as "full access" to SF.
I should not be the only one - I did not create this project after all.

But it should be GPL not LGPL.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 11:48 AM   #25
GLS
Addon Developer
 
GLS's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Urwumpe View Post
 I should not be the only one - I did not create this project after all.
That's why I said "of the people still around".
GLS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 11:59 AM   #26
Thorsten
Orbinaut
 
Thorsten's Avatar
Default

Quote:
Well, I'm confused now.
I was too until Urwumpe clarified. Sorry for triggering this discussion by spreading wrong information - I had only looked at the SF repository license statement, not into the files.

Last edited by Thorsten; 02-05-2018 at 12:03 PM.
Thorsten is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2018, 12:19 PM   #27
Urwumpe
Certain Super User
 
Urwumpe's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorsten View Post
 I was too until Urwumpe clarified. Sorry for triggering this discussion by spreading wrong information - I had only looked at the SF repository license statement, not into the files.
Well, we had been confused too at times.

When SSU started, we had just some source code files that had been passed from one developer to the other.

---------- Post added at 13:19 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by GLS View Post
 That's why I said "of the people still around".
Yeah. But I can try fixing it later. I am at work right now, 2 hours of budget for today left.
Urwumpe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-23-2018, 01:33 PM   #28
gattispilot
Addon Developer
 
gattispilot's Avatar
Default

So I am trying to redo a shuttle similar to shuttle fleet. With Donamy permission using the new rms arm.

I have been looking at SSU code for guideline. With that got lights and cameras in the payload bay.

BUT trying to get the rms light, cameras to work. all I get is static camera locations and now the attachment point is not following the animation.
gattispilot is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2018, 06:06 AM   #29
DelRioPilot
Orbinaut
Default

It's been a few years, but I'm finally trying to get back into Orbiter. I downloaded the 2016 version, but was disappointed to see Shuttle Fleet+AutoFCS is not compatible at all.

Those were some of my favorite add-ons. It almost makes me tempted to just revert to the 2010 version, which supported a large number of the add-ons I enjoyed.

Space Shuttle Ultra looks impressive, but the complexity doesn't appeal to me. Shuttle Fleet was always a compromise in my eyes which properly melded the entertainment value of Orbiter with the simulations aspect.

If a comparable version is ever offered for 2016, I'll be the first to download it and offer my sincere thanks!
DelRioPilot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2018, 07:33 AM   #30
Face
Beta Tester
 
Face's Avatar

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DelRioPilot View Post
 I downloaded the 2016 version, but was disappointed to see Shuttle Fleet+AutoFCS is not compatible at all.
David413, the author of Shuttle Fleet, holds all rights reserved on his work. Therefore, nobody but him can make it compatible with 2016 (or give permission to do so). You could try to contact him in this regards, perhaps with nice words and praise. However, keep in mind that he did not depart the community on exactly friendly terms.

Regarding recreating the experience from scratch, I would say the best approach is to fork the SSU project and re-use assets from there. Of course that would mean to put your project under GPL (and boy that means another can of worms), but the work already done there is impressive. Not tapping into this resources and instead recreating meshes/textures/panels all over again is just wasting time IMHO.

OTOH, wasting time can be fun, too.
Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
Reply

  Orbiter-Forum > Orbiter Addons > Addon Requests


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23 PM.

Quick Links Need Help?


About Us | Rules & Guidelines | TOS Policy | Privacy Policy

Orbiter-Forum is hosted at Orbithangar.com
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2007 - 2017, Orbiter-Forum.com. All rights reserved.