On 8/01/2013 00:52, Max Kellermann wrote:
On Monday, January 7, 2013 12:24:10 PM UTC+1, Evan Ludeman wrote:
While it is true that ClearNav is not interested in working with
XCSoar, we will, as previously mentioned, support the CAI dataport
communications standard for our upcoming CNv XC, so the XCSoar
community, as well as everybody else already has our protocol.

That's a trap. It sounds like "buy ClearNav, and it will work with
XCSoar", but it will not. Without cooperation, there _will_ be
problems[*].

([*] = it will work only if you emulate all CAI302 firmware bugs, bit
by bit, and all timings are identical. The thing is, the CAI302 does
not follow its own dataport communication standard. Not a big deal
for XCSoar, we have workarounds, but a standards-compliant device
will not work.)

We already know that ClearNav is not interested in XCSoar, and
therefore I am mutually not interested in ClearNav. Connecting a
ClearNav vario to XCSoar is explicitly not supported.

That sounds very much like pure, bloody-minded sour grapes, Max. XCSoar
will not work with Clear Nav because xcsoar will make sure it won't! I
love it when the lovey-dovey world of the open-source hot-gospellers
meets the slightest opposition to their world view. No more Mr Nice Guy!

Evan said CN was the same as Cambridge. Max says the Cambridge protocol
works well with XCsoar. It appears the only problem is that CN won't
grovel. Good for them!

I'm also interested that Max morphs here from just 'someone who's worked
on XCSoar' (earlier post) to 'I am mutually not interested'. It is
clear that XCSoar's salvation was Max imposing control and leadership on
a loose, woolly and dying project. A very commercial model. Similarly,
LK8000 is a tribute to Paolo's management skills as well as his code
writing talent.

Though I hope ClearNav changes their minds. (It's up to their
customers to highlight the importance of connectivity to them, or to
choose a vendor that is open enough for one's personal taste.)

'NOT very open' is generally my taste. There is some lovely open source
software but I believe that's in spite of the model rather than because
of it. There is also a vast wasteland of sloppy, bloated, unfinished
and buggy projects. Most open source people in my experience are rather
too intolerant of different views and obsessive and evangelical about
their preferred software model - as Max has demonstrated here and the
earlier threats and disparagement of Flarm showed.

I know this is all a bit off-topic but I resent open source's totally
unjustified claim to the moral high ground and I'll write against it
every time they push it. It's all just code and doing it for prestige
and reputation is no more praiseworthy than doing it for money.

Cheers,
GC