2fast4u Nabob wrote: > Hi, > > I have been lurking here for a while :) > > Jonathan Freedman wrote.."This is a good thing, and does not mean the > end of libsecondlife." > > I agree with Jonathan...the open source client should make > libsecondlife easier to implement since you don't have to > reverse-engineer everything now but also creates some opportunities. > > One thing that came to mind is a having libsecondlife become a > cohesive object model for alternate SL clients. libsecondlife could > follow the pattern of the relationship between the Win32 API and the > .NET Framework. Most people choose to use the .NET Framework instead > of the Win32 API simply because the framework is a lot more > approachable than the API - you can accomplish the same tasks in both > cases, but faster and with fewer bugs than when you use the API directly. > > Also, just because the client is open source does not mean that > everyone can immediately start creating their own SL clients - still > need to analyze, walk through various scenarios, etc. A libsecondlife > object model would go a long way to making SL more of a platform. > > -2fast >
It's also important to note that libsecondlife is under a more liberal license (BSD) than the viewer which will be released under the GPL. This means there are scenarios where libsecondlife would make sense to use and code adapted from the official viewer might not, and it also means we need to be careful about pulling code out of the viewer and sticking it in libsl. John _______________________________________________ Libsecondlife-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/libsecondlife-dev
