Question Negishima Space Center for Orbiter 2016/OpenOrbiter

[misha.physics]

Hi,
there's the good base Negishima Space Center by @Pipcard for Orbiter 2010. A little earlier I've made surface tiles for Orbiter 2016 and some little changes to be compatible with Orbiter 2016 (deleting trains, surface tiles from a base CFG, added flags for palm trees (the last is for OpenOrbiter). Also, I added mask tiles for water. I could share this update mentioning the original author.

Can I do that?

 

[MarkWatney2015]

You can contact Pipcard himself about your plans of adapting Negishima for Orbiter2016 and OpenOrbiter

 

[misha.physics]

I thought about this, but his last seen was in January 27, 2024, and I tagged his login a couple of times, so he should have seen the notification if he had visited this forum. But nevertheless I've just sent him a private message on the forum.

 

[N_Molson]

I thought about this, but his last seen was in January 27, 2024, and I tagged his login a couple of times, so he should have seen the notification if he had visited this forum. But nevertheless I've just sent him a private message on the forum.

I think he left for KSP (the Almighty Probe frowns mechanical eyebrows at him). Maybe you could get lucky asking around the KSP(1) still quite active forum.

 

[nbcfrosty]

Hi,
there's the good base Negishima Space Center by @Pipcard for Orbiter 2010. A little earlier I've made surface tiles for Orbiter 2016 and some little changes to be compatible with Orbiter 2016 (deleting trains, surface tiles from a base CFG, added flags for palm trees (the last is for OpenOrbiter). Also, I added mask tiles for water. I could share this update mentioning the original author.

Can I do that?

You could release the CFG changes without issue. Imo overwriting the mesh file(s) would require permission, though.

 

[misha.physics]

By the way, I didn't change any meshes. The main change is that I just made surface tiles from the original ones to be compatible with the Orbiter 2016 tile system. I guess I'll wait a little longer with this. I'm not hurry.

 

[Buck Rogers]

I would suggest releasing it as an unofficial update, with a dependcy on the original download (only include updated files). Unless there is explicit copyright not to be used in any form this should be ok. @Pipcard made some cool stuff and was a fine forum member (will be missed), It would great to see some of it in Orbiter2016+ (by the way he developed/designed a complete space agency. maybe KSP was easier for that, and many do come back to Orbiter...).

 

[N_Molson]

...and many do come back to Orbiter...).

'...not all those who wander are lost.'

 

[Sbb1413]

I always tend to adhere others' copyrights while publishing modifications of add-ons (or "mods of add-ons" for short) by retaining a lot of dependencies. Of course, I can legally publish modified versions of add-ons licensed under GPL or WTFPL (e.g. SpaceX package with BrianJ's add-ons), but I haven't done it yet.

 

[misha.physics]

I'm afraid dependencies make installation a little more difficult, since it's convenient when everything is in one archive. I could just provide a detailed notes what was added/changed/deleted. In fact, I've just made minimal edits to make the original base compatible with the new Orbiter version. No textures/meshes/etc changed.

 

[Sbb1413]

I'm afraid dependencies make installation a little more difficult, since it's convenient when everything is in one archive. I could just provide a detailed notes what was added/changed/deleted. In fact, I've just made minimal edits to make the original base compatible with the new Orbiter version. No textures/meshes/etc changed.

Then publish the minimal edits as a patch to run the add-on in Orbiter 2016. There are several patch mods of popular add-ons like this.