I think the majority of viewer and server developers are on Lindens side with this. OpenSim will never be a replacement for what the Linden grid provides, and is a wonderful tool that I hope a lot of client devs are using to enhance their development process. The fact still remains that the bulk of the work required to implement a new feature in SL is on the client side, and as with the products within SL, it's up to the developer to create something that users want and use.
Whether Linden implements a new feature or not really depends on their users showing an interest in those features. I would bet money that Linden is keeping a close eye on the more influential third party viewers and are figuring out what features could be profitable to port to their viewers. I wouldn't be surprised if features like mesh import were considered more seriously after we got them in OpenSim grids. I think the real problem here is the large amount of people who have decided to make it Lindens responsibility to maintain and release all the code coming from the community in their viewers. These folks need to stop posting here and start submitting patches to one of the many 3rd party viewer projects out there. I urge those of you complaining about not getting any attention from Linden to submit your patches to viewers such as Imprudence (http://imprudenceviewer.org/) or Emerald (http://www.modularsystems.sl/). Let the thousands of residents testing/using third party viewers decide if your code is worth porting around. On 3/14/2010 7:03 PM, Soft Linden wrote: > On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Woolley<ke...@geomantics.com> wrote: > >> I own three Sims in SL, that's ~$600 a month or so to the Lindens, and >> that's supported off DRM'ed content creation that I sell. If my income was >> to vanish because of widespread content theft then I'd be out of SL. >> >> I find Hax's attitude extremely concerning. >> > It's a good thing he's neither a contributor, nor - to the best of my > knowledge - representative of anyone with code in our project. He's > just a guy showing up with an opinion. > > > >> In fact I think we should now recognise that Open Sourcing the viewer has >> been a mistake, and the Lindens should close it off again, possibly >> replacing it with controlled licensed development. >> > copybot and copying proxies existed before the viewer was made open > source, and would continue to exist without the viewer being open > source. Abandoning source publication wouldn't stop the problem. There > are literally dozens of tools that don't use one line of our code. > > Keep in mind that open source projects also include clients and tools > that help identify copy botters, added clothing layer protection even > before Viewer 2, add automatic recognition of some copied content, and > more. It's also meant some better building and scripting tools, free > clothing texture upload previews and other things that help in > creating content. > > On the balance, the open source viewer has improved the situation for > content creators. > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > > _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
