On Aug 27, 4:41*am, Michael Jaworski
wrote:

I think those that are using LK8000 need to take a step back and ask
themselves whether what they are doing is really acceptable.

Michael -

As an IT professional I understand your stance on this. Were XCSoar a
commercial product or the results of a dedicated team that was still
working on it, I would have some of those same feelings. However:

1) Both products are free. No one is losing money or being driven out
of business.
2) Most of the team that originally put together XCSoar is, as I
undertand it, no longer involved in the product. The 1 or 2 new
people that have taken control of XCSoar did not actually develop it
AFAIK. If the original developers want to be upset then I can
understand - but that's not the same thing as the current developer
being upset. AND I would point out to the original developers that
their hard work is still completely available as XCSoar or the XCSoar
source. Also: remember that the LK8000 developer WAS one of the
XCSoar authors/contributors - not a black knight who swooped in from
nowhere and "stole" the code.
3) LK8000 is not going to be a commercial product. Heck, XCSoar was
much closer to being a commercial product in the first place, via the
Triadis flight computer. Given what's already freely available, I
don't see a commercially-viable path for LK8000 in any case.

Look, we can talk in abstracts and ideals; but there's a need to be
pragmatic and realistic about the situation. We're dealing with
personalities and egos that created this mess; and both sides have
chosen to try to exclude the other party, while still making the
results of their work available to the public for free (the LK8000
developer refuses to even accept donations to cover website costs).

Is there a violation of the GPL going on? Possibly. Is the "spirit"
of the GPL being violated? Yes. But is it materially harming
anyone? That's a much tougher question to answer... If I knew it
*was* harming someone, I wouldn't use it; but I don't see how its
causing harm at this point. I'm not happy about the situation, but I
don't see a "perfect" solution at this point. The LK8000 developer
has claimed that the source-code will be made available at a future
date when the software is publicly distributed. Personally I believe
that the best thing for me to do is to apply gentle pressure and
persuasion, to try to encourage this to come true sooner rather than
later.

The practical reality is this: We don't have to like it; but asking
people to stop using a superior product is just not going to happen -
not when its free and already "in the wild".

--Noel