They would be welcomed. The license is compatible, I checked.
Melanie On 27/05/2015 03:24, W Smith wrote: > First of all I have no interest in extracting anything from the AA* functions > or any other part of Aurora-Sim that is not required by LSL functions. > > I was only looking at the possibility of extracting usable code from the LSL > ll* functions. The one I was looking at first were the llJson* and > llList2Json. The other 20+ LSL function that seem to be missing from OpenSim > I was going to have a go at later, and at a minimum produce a "not > Implemented" placeholder version so at least constants and method signatures > would be available for someone to fill out. > > It turns out, after attempting it, there are some quite large differences > between what the aurora-sim json functions do and how they behave in SL so > the Aurora code turns out to be more a tutorial on using the OSD libraries > than a proper implementation to be copied. > > A few parts of the Aurora sim function are usable (general looping structure) > as is but most require changes to correct the differences with SLs version. > > Since these functions rely heavily on the use OSD libraries, and personally I > cannot see that use as being copyrightable, and looping through a list cannot > be done many ways either. > > So, back to my original question, will this be likely to be acceptable? > > Talun > > -------------------------------------------- > On Wed, 27/5/15, Fly Man <[email protected]> wrote: > > Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Harvesting code from forks of Opensim > To: [email protected] > Date: Wednesday, 27 May, 2015, 1:18 > > Let me answer most > questions that have been shooting up in my personal mailbox > which have to do with Opensim as a project. > > I'll start with > perhaps the most easy part of the discussion: AuroraSim. > > AuroraSim is a derivated > from OpenSim, forked on the 14th of October 2010 after Rev > (RevolutionSmythe) decided that Opensim wasn't going > into the way he personally had seen. He decided to fork the > Opensim tree and renamed it to AuroraSim. In the years > following he upgraded parts of the source-code and added a > set of new functional code parts knows as the > aaFunctions. > > These > functions are based on the code that he wrote at that moment > for the AuroraSim branch. Remember, this is an OLDER copy of > what the current Opensim branch is now. Most of the > functions in there won't ever work in Opensim mainly > because Opensim does not have these older hooks. > > In 2013 Rev was done > with his education and decided to start working which > brought AuroraSim to a slower moving branch and patches > weren't applied instantly anymore. The last patch that > was applied to the sourcecode was Jan 2014 and the project > slowly died. > > So, > currently there's no maintainer of any of the code that > was/is in AuroraSim other then what is currently in that > GitHub repository. > > Now here comes the part which Kevin > already mentioned: "The fork is called > WhiteCore" > > Indeed, WhiteCore is a fork of > AuroraSim after I personally saw what was happening to > AuroraSim. I had been watching the slow pace for a longer > period of time and already had found 2 other people that had > the same "issue". So in December 2013 AuroraSim > was forked and re-based as WhiteCoreSim. > > Currently in development with 2 > other developers, I am 1 of the 3 lead developers that > actively maintain that "fork" although it's > not even close to what the endgoal for it will be. > > 1 thing that we > broke "on purpose" when we changed the name is the > aaFunctions because only Rev knows exactly how they are > meant to work. At the moment there's no other person who > knows what exactly the functions are meant to do other then > a better way to have NPC's spawn and some basic > functions that mimic the osFunctions. > > Conclusion: There's no developer > at the moment that can look into Rev's head from a > distance and ask him how the functions are meant to work (if > they still work at all) and my -1 was meant to say > "Please do not put things that no one knows about in > OpenSim" > > > > 2015-05-27 1:58 GMT+02:00 > Dahlia Trimble <[email protected]>: > Just to clarify on > the slight chance it was missed, I wasn't suggesting > anyone "fork off" in any sense of the term. Many > forks, both public and private, already exist and I suspect > more will come about. My hope is that the community will > survuve and even thrive beyond any code fork. > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at > 4:22 PM, Morgaine <[email protected]> > wrote: > Dahlia writes: > > > I'd like to see disagreement and forks as a means to > drive innovation rather than conflict. > > More often than not, > real project forking into separate projects (not just > forking in the github sense) implies an inability or lack of > desire to find a meeting of minds with technical peers. > > If requirements are > dramatically different then project forking can be a very > reasonable way forward, and to the benefit of everybody. > But if the requirements are really quite similar then > forking is more likely an indication of inflexibility and > intransigence by one or both parties. The communal > engineering process has probably failed. > > This is a > technical project, so it's inherently different to > discussing the merits of cat pictures -- discussions can be > objective. A rationally presented suggestion or even a > strong criticism presented in good faith is not a reason for > telling people to fork off. If that is the response then > it's a sign of extreme project ill health. > > Negative feedback > is intrinsic to good engineering, and all good engineers > embrace it. That's not theoretical. Without it a > project's direction would never change to take into > consideration the bitter lessons of experience. > > Morgaine. > > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at > 11:35 PM, Dahlia Trimble <[email protected]> > wrote: > Apparently there is still a fair bit of passion > about this platform and I prefer to see this in a manner > where people can use the code in a way they see fit and to > (hopefully) contribute back something or pay it forward in > other ways as appropriate. I'm not opposed to forks but > I'd hope civil discourse can be maintained even through > the times when much disagreement looms. I would hope that > various forks and branches could benefit from each other and > the community as a whole can thereby benefit. I'd like > to see disagreement and forks as a means to drive innovation > rather than conflict. > > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at > 2:14 PM, Morgaine <[email protected]> > wrote: > Good data, thanks Cinder. It doesn't > look like death to me. > > You clearly have some elite query-foo > skills, can you generate a historical list of commits per > month and per year? This is a very strong way of debunking > allegations of death! :P > > > On Tue, May 26, > 2015 at 10:05 PM, Cinder Roxley <[email protected]> > wrote: > On May 26, 2015 at 2:59:54 > PM, Morgaine ([email protected]) > wrote: I'm just an observer > on this project, albeit a very long term one, dating back to > near the beginning. One thing that long-term observers are > well qualified to do is to confirm or to deny the veracity > of allegations of long-term trends. > > Mike Chase's allegation that > > "OpenSim is slowly dieing > (IMO) from neglect" > > is clearly unfounded since commits show > no sign of stopping. I haven't checked the rate of > commits so perhaps Mike has more information in this > regard. I welcome better > information.https://www.openhub.net/p/opensimulator/commits/summary-- > Cinder > Roxley > Sent > with Airmail > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Opensim-dev mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > > > > -----Inline Attachment Follows----- > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > _______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
