On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 9:22 AM, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) < o...@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> > Eventually (and there is _no_ plan for when this will be - certainly > longer than 3 months), it will no longer be possible for us to continue > to support viewers based on the 1.x code base (including our own), and > we'll stop. > > If this is the case, then you need to reconsider your booming Wizard of Oz proclamation of: “Don’t waste everyones time suggesting that we throw away Viewer 2, or that > we revert the UI to Viewer 1. It is absolutely not going to > happen, and any suggestion to that effect will be ignored.” > > from: > http://www.mail-archive.com/opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com/msg02459.html > What you are doing by that, is setting the puzzle pieces together which will result in quite a migration of users (and viewer developers) away from LL. An interesting note is that you have only been at LL (and apparently, in SL) for only 4 months. You are making a decision on something where 90% of the community has much more experience than you. The other interesting note is what Philip just said in an interview: >From the interview with Philip, I see: Mitch Wagner "Fast, Easy, Fun" with Second Life founder Philip Rosedale Viewer 2 also needs to be beefed up for Second Life content creators, who nearly universally criticize the software as a giant step backward from the previous version. "We'll rapidly make the Viewer 2 codebase have the capabilities that everybody wants," Rosedale said. from: http://blogs.computerworld.com/16905/second_life I've been watching LL and using SL almost every day for 4.5 years. The course you are setting in motion will have this effect: - developers will focus on the 1.x codebase, or on Kirsten's 2.x work. They only have so many unpaid cycles to work. They will apply them to where they see the community getting the most benefit. - If LL shuts off 1.x access, and if the viewer does not have 1.x UI features, many in the community will migrate to OpenSim-based grids. - A common viewer code base outside of LL will come into being. Compatibility with SL will become a lower priority item. The other trend is that ultimately, many will realize that it is easier to migrate to a Unity3D foundation, and add SL-specific features to that, than it is to try to meld the 1.x or 2.x codebases into something with that level of quality. Daniel Smith / Bucky Barkley -- Daniel Smith - Sonoma County, California http://daniel.org/resume
_______________________________________________ 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
