Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Can someone explain to me why the core developers insist on control of the 
code, but refuse to manage the project?  I ask again:  what are your plans for 
the future of Open Simulator?  It's ok to say you don't have any, let's make 
some!

I'll throw out some ideas based on the MOSES goals and objectives:

1)  Scale limitations lifted.  We need a system that is governed by its 
available hardware and network resources, not bound by software limits.

2)  Let's create clear definitions of "stability".

3)  Clear and up-to-date API documentation.

4)  Clear and up-to-date OS deployment guidance under numerous typical network 
topologies.

5)  Bug identification & reduction.

6)  Efficient ray tracing.  Useful for simulation of sensors as well as 
naturalized bot interactions.

7)  N-body physics.  Would be nice to have vehicles that can follow terrain 
and not look like Star Wars land speeders.  Would also be nice to have more 
natural avatar movement rather than the rigid animations we use now.

What are yours?  Anyone?

v/r -doug

Dr. Douglas Maxwell
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209



-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Justin Clark-Casey
Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 7:40 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] The Future of Open Simulator(?) (UNCLASSIFIED)

I won't comment much over future direction.  However, Overte was never a 
governing entity, it was set up only to manage CLAs and maybe some other 
things in the future (which never got realized).  Power over development 
direction has always been with the developers.

CLAs for open-source projects tend to come from corporations running those 
projects that are very worried about getting sued.  The vast majority have no 
such structures.  It is very debatable whether anything other than the 
open-source license is needed.


And there are many different project structures out there.  Linux, for 
example, is controlled by a single individual who, along with a group of 
authorized lieutenants, controls everything that goes into the codebase.  That 
is an evolution since Linus used to be the sole committer (and got overwhelmed 
by it).

The direction of evolution is not inevitably to some managing organization. 
Or at the very least, the developers much always be in charge of what happens 
to the codebase.



On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) 
<[email protected]> wrote:


        Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
        Caveats: NONE

        Projects evolve.

        I couldn't begin to estimate the amount of work that has gone into this
        valuable project.  The potential for technical and economic success is
        profound and I see a bright future for the Open Simulator.  That said, 
I fear
        we are at a crossroads at this time with this project.

        It is unclear at this time what the maintainers of the Open Simulator 
code
        have planned for the project.  Is there a roadmap or some sort of
        goals/objectives you are working against?  What development targets 
would you
        like to see met in 12, 16, and 24 months from now?

        The MOSES project has needs & requirements that we are stepping up and
        supporting with internal development, but we aren't the drivers for the 
Open
        Simulator project.  We've done our own internal gap analysis and 
determined
        where in the OS code there should be investment in stability, 
monitoring, and
        scalability improvements.  In short, we are returning our code to you to
        adhere and abide by applicable derivative source code licensing terms.

        I believe the removal of the Overte as a formal governing entity is a 
mistake
        if you plan to encourage participation from business and government.  
The CLA
        was viewed by my organization as a formalized relationship 
acknowledging the
        legal responsibility of open source code stewardship and use.

        If this were simply a hobby, then Overte and the CLA would not be 
needed.
        However, the Open Simulator is being used by businesses charging money 
for
        service, by researchers studying human behavior and technical behavior, 
by
        educators, and more.  Like it or not, you have created a product that 
needs
        management and attention at a higher level than the ad-hoc method that 
is
        currently your standard operating procedures.

        Project management must evolve.

        As projects are started at the grass roots and then emerge as valued
        commodities, the need for different styles of management is required.  A
        project with two active developers is different than a project with 20 
or 
200.
        If the management does not evolve, then the project will be limited and 
growth
        is not possible.  I encourage you to think about a new structure that 
can
        handle influx of large amounts of donated code in a short time.  The 
kinds of
        investments needed to make this a world class simulator requires you to 
step
        up and begin project planning.

        This is a community effort.

        If the community values this work and would like to see it grow or even
        receive maintenance, then the community must voice.  This code does not 
belong
        in the hands of a gov't agency or corporate entity.  This code belongs 
in the
        hands of a strong non-profit that can handle grant and contract funds 
to pay 
a
        staff of maintainers, code reviewers, testers, and functional area code
        managers.  This could be an Overte spin-off, or even an academic 
institution
        of some kind.

        I've given you a glimpse into what the next 9 months of development for 
the
        MOSES related Open Simulator issues.  We came in this spring at a time 
when
        development seemed to be winding down and things were quiet after the 
0.8.x
        releases.  What will you do when we reach the logical conclusion of our 
work?
        What is next for Open Simulator?

        I look forward to your feedback and constructive discourse.

        v/r -doug

        Dr. Douglas Maxwell
        Science and Technology Manager
        Virtual World Strategic Applications
        U.S. Army Research Lab
        Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
        (c) (407) 242-0209



        Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
        Caveats: NONE



        _______________________________________________
        Opensim-dev mailing list
        [email protected]
        http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev





Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

Reply via email to