Web-based autopilot route

[jamos.tan@gmail.com]

Sounds to me like we need a plugin that makes using autopilot within OpenCPN easier to use... and more configurable... something that does not depend on "right click"

Indeed, that might be a good option. Something in the line of:

- Big button for "create new route" (when describing "big" I mean what is responsiveness-ly responsible, if that is even a word haha)
- Option for "first waypoint = x meters ahead of current course"?
- The middle of the screen something like a cross / crossair will be the next waypoint after that 
- When tapping the screen once, that will be the next waypoint
- A big button for Save route
- A big button for Activate route
- A big button for Engage Autopilot (for pypilot)

I'm not sure how the MFD's from Garmin, B&G or Raymarine do this but I suppose it is a good idea to check this, to avoid re-inventing the wheel. (The wheel that is soon to be autopiloted I hope  )

---

I guess my problem with all this is philosophical.  I have been a Linux user for 20 year now and it has become religion for me to not use Microsoft or Apple.  We have many examples of monopolizing corporate interests manipulating the market for their own gain.  They offer freebies as enticements to get people dependent on their products, then they switch the game once people have built their lives around it.  Take Whatsapp, Skype, and West Marine as a few examples.  They have very strategic, long term plans to take over.  I would argue that the creators of Linux-based solutions should keep that in the forefront of their minds when developing their software.  Take Java, for example.  When someone makes software that is operating system independent by using Java, they may be sacrificing long-term viability in order to obtain a short-term broad user base.   What would happen to all the programs that use Java today if suddenly Oracle required a $1,000 license for it?

I guess I should mention that I am strictly a user of software, not a programmer.  My perspective is shaped by what I have to do to use software.  My concerns with the development of the software are only related to my present and future ability to use and obtain the software for free and to use it for my own benefit, not for the benefit of corporations.  By creating software that requires elements that are provided by huge corporations seems to me to play right into their hands.  

As a user, I once had Ubuntu and I loaded OpenCPN and I used it right off the bat.  Now, things are getting more complicated.  It is, of course my responsibility how deep I want to go into this because if I want to be able to use open source hardware alternatives, I suppose I have to work at it.  I chose to use a Rasberry Pi because I took on a wave that sent water into the boat that soaked my laptop.  That was the immediate end to my laptop.  However, going with the Pi has proven much more complicated.  I now need to become a hardware and software engineer to use it.  Its probably good for me, and I enjoy the challenge, but things like OpenPlotter and Signal K seem to be bogging me down.  I keep getting messages about conflicts.  I know I will get it in time but I come back to my philosophical concerns.  If, as Sean says, that Signal K “seems to be based on existing nmea2000 autopilots” is in fact true, then what is the intention of the creators of Signal K?   Is it an attempt to rescue the developers of commercial equipment from an onslaught by the open source community and guide open source to a point that will force its hand?  We need to ask questions like this rather than just uncritically accept every new development in the open source realm as furthering open source in the future.

A few weeks ago, I was having difficulty using Pypilot with OpenPlotter.  The screen wouldn’t work and I went round and round with Sean trying to get it to work.  However, I decided to try Tinypilot and now it works.  With OpenPlotter I could not use Pypilot with all its functionality.  OpenPlotter used a much older version of Pypilot and even after I loaded a newer version, I still was not able to use it.  The benefits don’t seem to go both ways.

Would it not be possible to develop Pypilot and OpenCPN to be able to obtain NMEA (0183 and 2000) data without Signal K or OpenPlotter?  How about being able to output NMEA data without it?  As Sean says: “I would rather signalk-server not be written in javascript as it is forcing me into web development for a program that has nothing to do with the web.”  

As a user, I want the software to work without continually adding layers and taking my time.  I also want to prevent corporate interests from getting at my pocketbook.

I totally understand the points you are making. Avoiding a complex infrastructure, or necessity of installing, configuring and maintaining too many layers just to provide for some functionality may often be not only unwanted, but also can pose a risk. Just trying to build something for the sake of delivering is something that needs to be considered carefully. It's hard to keep things stable and to a certain standard as it is. Reducing complexity and simplifying infra/architecture is something that has always been on my mind and definitely deserves attention. In my personal situation that meant in this specific case being able to use any (smart)device, logging into the WiFi-AP, and just use the browser and point it to an IP that is running the software that I need. Taking out the need of client software was what appealed to me in this case. But, indeed in many cases that piece of software does not always do the things that we want, hence the feature request.

I see that Sean and others who have anything to do with Signalk's development keep putting a lot of effort in discussions around SignalK or Pypilot's compatibility and I'm really thankful for that by itself. I understand that there are strong and open minds or something in between and it can be a challenge in finding some common ground sometimes.

But it is my hope that we'll just keep talking and eventually make things for the better.