A suggestion to resolve the license issues !

[ReaperMan]

Hello BMS devs and pilots

I would like to suggest a possible solution for the license issues that bms dev team is having.

simply if the problem is the distribution of falcon 4.0 source code deep in the bms setup, then the solution is obviously to transform bms setup into a patch that use files from falcon 4.0 installation on the user’s computer without including any of the licensed data of falcon 4.0 in the patch !

i don’t have enough programming knowledge but i think that it should work however it needs some efforts.

Thanks

[Hornet]

BMS Team must be really lucky to have brilliant folks like you as I am sure, otherwise nobody would ever have considered this idea!
Especially not after having already been and coming from exactly there…

no offense, dude. take it easy.
We from the outside do not even know what those “issues” might be, so it makes no sense to step in there.
They’ll know what to do :thumbs:

[Revolpathon]

plus some of that deep code you mentioned is dynamic campaign code… which i’ve heard was a bitch to do and the guy who did it never wants to do anything like it ever again for any money… not going to work

[PlayLoud]

@Revolpathon:

plus some of that deep code you mentioned is dynamic campaign code… which i’ve heard was a bitch to do and the guy who did it never wants to do anything like it ever again for any money… not going to work

The dynamic campaign being the most unique thing about Falcon 4… I can’t imagine not having it. I was planning on developing a new sim (with better than DCS graphics, BMS+ realism, and of course, a dynamic campaign) from the ground up after I won that $1.5 billion PowerBall the other day… But my numbers didn’t win.

[SoBad]

I’d like to suggest another possible solution: How about those of us not directly involved in the negotiation process between the BMS team and the ‘new owners’ simply refrain from thinking that they could possibly have any meaningful input, considering our absolute absence of any knowledge of the issues and options being discussed between the involved parties? Just my two cents.

[Revolpathon]

+1

[Eseem]

SoBad, that’s ridiculous, the best way to deal with this situation is to have everyone on here write a 10 page essay on possible methods for solving the problem. And then make sure they’re all peer-reviewed properly. And discussed furiously.

[SoBad]

@Eseem:

SoBad, that’s ridiculous, the best way to deal with this situation is to have everyone on here write a 10 page essay on possible methods for solving the problem. And then make sure they’re all peer-reviewed properly. And discussed furiously.

My bad. I withdraw in shame… :oops:

[vincent_dimicco]

Which license issues? What is happening?

[Mower]

@SoBad:

My bad. I withdraw in shame… :oops:

Said that to the prone-to-violence-cop-wife the other night … one to many Jeremiah Weeds.

[Blu3wolf]

@ReaperMan:

Hello BMS devs and pilots

I would like to suggest a possible solution for the license issues that bms dev team is having.

simply if the problem is the distribution of falcon 4.0 source code deep in the bms setup, then the solution is obviously to transform bms setup into a patch that use files from falcon 4.0 installation on the user’s computer without including any of the licensed data of falcon 4.0 in the patch !

i don’t have enough programming knowledge but i think that it should work however it needs some efforts.

Thanks

While you are correct that that would solve the distribution of ND code issue, its (I gather) a bit like suggesting that if water is so valuable in space, we should just take the atlantic to space, so that water would be cheap.

Ive been looking at how to do this, when the target is a simple mod made entirely from lua. Its a small mod, but even so this is an incredibly time consuming and non simple task.

Scaling that up to a programming language (lua is scripting only) with compiled files, and Im not even sure that that is possible let alone feasible. Certainly I couldnt do anything like that.

I would have liked to second SoBads suggestion, but Eseem has countered that with an excellent counterargument, so I will have to suggest that instead.

[Stevie]

@Mower:

Said that to the prone-to-violence-cop-wife the other night … one to many Jeremiah Weeds.

…never date anyone that can bench press you.

[Demo]

@SoBad:

I’d like to suggest another possible solution: How about those of us not directly involved in the negotiation process between the BMS team and the ‘new owners’ simply refrain from thinking that they could possibly have any meaningful input, considering our absolute absence of any knowledge of the issues and options being discussed between the involved parties? Just my two cents.

Well said.

ReaperMan - I know you had good intentions, but I’m closing this thread. Trust that BMS management is working the issue and will communicate any outcome when the time is right.