Doug seriously, if you think I do not understand that you are crazy, the fact that you could not explain that before now means you should not be involved in this conversation either, but don't worry I am done discussing anything with the MOSES team, as far as I am concerned I am not very interested and would prefer that MOSES work on their own fork for their own needs. I still have not seen any kind of improvements on the MOSES grid, good luck with that.
On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 9:26 AM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY RDECOM ARL (US) <[email protected]> wrote: > We looked into modifying the client about a year ago as part of our > initial design reviews. The licensing issues surrounding the client were > so complex, we simply abandoned the effort. This is why we are working on > the HTML5/WebGL JavaScript version, to eliminate the client problem > altogether. > > > > Michael, the fact that you don't understand how proper simulator > statistics reporting would benefit those who are trying to improve > simulator performance means you should probably not be involved in the > discussion. > > > Douglas Maxwell, Ph.D. > Science and Technology Manager > Virtual World Strategic Applications > U.S. Army Research Lab > Human Research & Engineering Directorate > (c) (407) 242-0209 <%28407%29%20242-0209> > ------------------------------ > *From:* [email protected] [ > [email protected]] on behalf of Michael Emory > Cerquoni [[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 10, 2015 12:06 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* [Non-DoD Source] Re: [Opensim-dev] Still on Sim and Phys > Frames per Second (FPS) > > All active links contained in this email were disabled. Please verify the > identity of the sender, and confirm the authenticity of all links contained > within the message prior to copying and pasting the address to a Web > browser. > > ------------------------------ > > > I think the big problem is the viewer teams are slow to pickup these > changes and fixes, most of the viewer projects seem quite dead to me at the > moment, there have been major fixes we have all been waiting quite a very > long time for Singularity to do, I cant speak with certainty but this > project seems at best to be on pause. Replex is no longer being updated, > Kokua is no longer being updated, I can not say what is really happening > with Firestorm as their involvement has always been through what seems to > be a high power telescope from very far away. Most of the other viewers > all seem to serve a niche purpose. We have OnLook viewer now which is > designed with the intention of serving only the needs of OpenSimulator and > not Second Life, but quite literally no one has volunteered to be > involved. What bothers me about saying get the viewer teams to fix it > there is only one response, what viewer teams? Also if that was the > intended goal why was this not coordinated prior to the break, to just go > ahead break something and then call it progress while leaving stuff broken > and then say oh someone else should fix that is quite unprofessional in any > setting. We need to resolve this problem of viewer development or quite > honestly this whole thing is dead in its tracks, without a constantly > improving viewer OpenSim is looking more and more like a dead end. That > said its never to late to revive things and start wallking the path to > improvement, but as a group we need to stop focusing on the wrong things. > What i see is people chasing ghosts of problems that are not the real core > problems of what this project has and needs, with little to zero > improvements as a result. Can anyone name a single improvement that has > come from changing the stats? Where are the patches, where are the > scientific write ups showing that this was a success, so far to me this > whole thing with stats seems like a big distraction that is not only not > beneficial so far, its causing strife between the developers. Personally I > don't have the solutions, my time is very limited anymore and I cant spend > the time I have in the past testing things and coordinating people like I > have, we need more people to step up and do the right thing without making > people feel like its being shoved down their throats. > > > On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 11:48 AM, GarminKawaguichi < > [email protected] < Caution-mailto: > [email protected] > > wrote: > >> I quite agree with what Seth wrote. >> >> GCI >> >> Le 09/11/2015 16:05, Seth Nygard a écrit : >> >> Let the FPS wars begin so there can be confusion everywhere... >> Now those that want to can set a ridiculous fudge factor and show >> 11000000FPS - WOW, look, waaaaaaay faster than "that other grid"! >> >> I firmly disagree in adding anything that allows artificially inflated >> metrics for any value. At this stage the configurable fudge factor is an >> even worse "fix" IMHO. >> >> The correct fix is really to communicate the correct value(s) and put >> pressure on the viewer developers to fix their lag calculation(s). People >> can be expected to update their viewer(s) which is not an unrealistic >> expectation. People running old and/or unsupported viewers already have a >> plethora of issues they need to be aware of and things that don't work >> right, so why is the lag indicator any different? >> >> If we must have this user configurable then, instead of a fudge factor >> value it should be a simple boolean setting such as; >> ShowArtificiallyInflatedAndIncorrectFPS = false; >> ShowArtificiallyInflatedAndIncorrectFPS = true; >> >> On my grid I have made it a point to inform everyone that the calculated >> lag indicator is broken and the 11FPS is in the correct and normal value. >> I also point out that what used to be shown was in fact a falsified and >> artificially inflated value to make things look like "that other grid". >> Most people simple say "Oh yeah, I never paid attention to that anyhow. It >> doesn't work right any of the time anyhow". Many then say they looked at >> the wiki but couldn't find any information on what to expect. >> >> If whenever people ask for documentation the standard reply from the dev >> community is "read the code" then why is it so hard to ask for, and expect >> the viewers to be fixed and updated? >> >> -Seth >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] < Caution-mailto: >> [email protected] > >> Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> < Caution-http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> > >> >> > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni > > _______________________________________________ > Opensim-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev > > -- Michael Emory Cerquoni
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
