I thought I could mention here, fwiw and from a python head out here in the aether, that the project pretty much lost me as a potential contributor with the architectural decisions. The time I can spend on any particular open source project is weighed heavily against the curve of learning the "way" of it. There is only so much time I can put into non-paying work. Plain old python I have been with for years but I just don't have time or inclination to adapt to a bunch of other ways of doing things unless there is a very compelling reason to do so. A bonus is if I can apply that "way" to my regular work and none of these particular components offer that that I can see.
Anyway, I, for one, do hope things get back to basics as I would very much like to contribute and wanted to mention it as a case for attracting other bodies that was mentioned in a couple of other posts in this thread. best regards JB On Fri, Jul 25, 2008 at 1:51 PM, Meadhbh S. Hamrick (Infinity Linden) < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I should chime in here as I'm probably the lead instigator in the "this is > getting unnecessarily complicated" wing of the PyOGP project. > For the most part, i'm going to stay out of discussions re: the values of > ZCA, webob, grok, buildout, etc. They are all great projects. > > However... > > Right now, it seems there's not enough "there" there in PyOGP to justify > placing a ZCA, buildout, webob, grok based infrastructure around it. If we > can't use "plain ol' python" to code a simple library to manage connections, > send and receive messages, then there's something seriously wrong with > Python, OGP or the world in general. > > Fortunately, I don't think we can't use "plain ol' python" to build our > components, and then add a zope framework around it. Er... which is a round > about way of saying... > > 1. we can use "plain ol' python" to build our core library > 2. we can code to interfaces without Zope or ZCA > 3. we don't even need to eggify the code in order to demonstrate it running > 4. eggification, buildout, ZCA, webob and grok are all useful, and can be > integrated at a later date > > and > > 5. at the moment, I think it's advantageous to use only those bits of > python that ship with 2.4 (or even 2.3) to demonstrate working code. Then > add eggification, buildout, ZCA, webob and grok. > > Also... I would like to thank Tao / CS / MrTopf for being available to > dispel a number of misconceptions i had about these components and about the > structure of the source tree. > > And with that... I'm going to shut up and go write some more code. > > -Cheers > -meadhbh / infinity > > On Jul 24, 2008, at 10:27 PM, Enus Linden wrote: > > So I've been mulling it over, and philosophical concerns aside, I'd like to > think about the practical impacts of the architectural decisions we made a > month ago. > > We've chosen to include components in pyogp that the group is finding > challenging to work with. Tao spends a lot of time describing how things > need to be done to work in the framework, and we aren't collectively moving > forward as quickly as we could due to uncertainty on how to do things. I am > concerned that the code will become a maintenance issue down the road. I'm > also concerned pyogp won't be an accessible code base to open source devs, > or Linden Lab devs themselves. It hasn't proven itself to be so yet... > > Issues challenging us will settle as we solve them, but that doesn't solve > accessibility and maintenance concerns I have. > > The primary goal we have is to test OGP enabled grids; the agent domain, > region domain, sims, etc. We do this by building a client library and test > suite. It seems to me that we've made it more challenging for the > participants involved so far than in necessary. > > I'm just thinking here. It's not too late to refactor back to a simpler > world. We lose some measure of flexibility and formality, but these can be > regained later if it's fitting. I think we would gain development speed, > accessibility, and maintainability, and ultimately more functional code > faster. > > Thought I'd throw this out before the get together tomorrow. I do > appreciate and admire the work and the contributors. I just am feeling > troubled by how things are going, and want to do right by our time and > efforts... > > Thoughts would be appreciated. > > thanks > > enus > > --------- > > Enus Linden aka Aaron Terrell > email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > sl: http://secondlife.com > > _______________________________________________ > Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription: > https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pyogp > > > > _______________________________________________ > Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription: > https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pyogp > >
_______________________________________________ Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription: https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pyogp
