Making a copy is the greater evil. With implicitly shared assets, only content creators create assets. With asset copying, each sale/give creates assets. Take SL:
I make a clothing item. I have to make 18 uploads (creating 18 assets) to finally use 2 of the uploaded textures. I have also created 36 wearable assets through this. Then i put that item for sale. 2000 users buy it. With implicitly shared assets, assets consumed: 18 texture, 36 wearable. With asset copying, assets consumed: 4001 texture, 4003 wearable See, the point of diminishing returns for copying is very close. Melanie John Ward wrote: > Justin Clark-Casey wrote: >> The problem is that you may have given that item to somebody else. >> Giving an item does not make an asset copy, it just makes an >> inventory item copy (both inventory items still point towards the >> same asset). >> >> So you may delete your item, but we don't know if the asset >> referenced by that item lives on in someone else's inventory (or in >> an object inventory). So we can't delete the underlying asset. > > Why not make an asset copy when one makes an inventory copy? Then > delete the asset when deleted from inventory. Is each user having their > own copy of many things a bigger problem? I guess this doesn't address > one having out of ban knowledge of an assets UUID and expecting it to be > there. Also, I accept that I may be missing some fundamental knowledge > of how things work. Please be gentle :-) > > John. > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev