On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> wrote:
> > If it was possible to add arbitrary extra code and/or make > arbitrary changes without that it gets harder and harder to > keep up with changes in the main viewer, then it would the > call of the open source community as much as that of LL imho. > But that is not the case. Nobody referred to "arbitrary extra code", no straw men please. ;-) Some things will be perfectly reasonable to expect in Snowglobe, agreed by patch developers and full committers to be a good thing, even when Lindens may choose not to import them back into their vendor branch (yet). As an example, it is quite easy to imagine VWRAP providing transport for Collada mesh objects that work in Opensim long before they do in SL. I expect that Snowglobe will be a leading test environment for such things. So we're not talking about "arbitrary extra code", but about perfectly reasonable features that will be required in Snowglobe if it is to be a useful viewer for VW interoperation. Morgaine. =================================== On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 5:48 PM, Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> wrote: > In what respect did I miss this? > > Are you implying that it should be possible to add new features > that Linden Lab *disagrees* with? > > If not, and as you say they don't disagree with VWRAP, then I don't > see the issue. VWRAP compatibility falls in category 2, it's a new > "feature", hardly anyone here will be even interested in given > feedback because it's rather straight forward (add VWRAP compatibility > to snowglobe) and that will not change any ones user experience, apart > from adding possibilities). > > LL will say: ok go ahead, and then we can start to implement it. > > The main reason that I think that LL has the last say in what > goes into snowglobe is because they (merov? maybe it should just > be merov's call) has to keep syncing the main viewer with > snowglobe. For example, if I propose to run 'indent' on the > source code and change the indentation of every source line > then Merov will stop that 100MB patch from being committed. > It is mainly with that issue in mind that I wanted to give LL > the last say about new features. > > If it was possible to add arbitrary extra code and/or make > arbitrary changes without that it gets harder and harder to > keep up with changes in the main viewer, then it would the > call of the open source community as much as that of LL imho. > But that is not the case. > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 05:23:44PM +0000, Morgaine wrote: > > Carlo, you're missing something very important in your write-up. > > > > The issue that you haven't covered is that Snowglobe is intended for > > interoperation with other worlds as well, not just with SL. Our work in > VWRAP > > has the goal of allowing a single client to work with any virtual world > that > > can speak the protocol, and this applies very directly to Snowglobe. > [...] > > -- > Carlo Wood <ca...@alinoe.com> >
_______________________________________________ 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
