Is there a solution to create some standard avatars in the database so that
the a new account creator on the webinterface can choose one of them?
After the account creator enter his user information and choose a avatar the
database will duplicate the standard avatar to the real user database and
That's been my thought all along. What if the content in the users
inventory is my IP. I've granted a license for a customer/user to use
it (perhaps even limited to where the content is used).
I appreciate the energy around the hypergrid concept. But there are lots
of scenarios where the
Yes, just voicing my opinion. And my concern is that you will prevent
me from running a walled garden in trying to get your inventory on the
client hypergrid model working.
As has been pointed out, the sources are BSD licensed, I could always
fork what's there and do my own thing. It seemed
Well, Mike. I respect your opinion and the others expressed about our existing
community.
The community is what has gotten us to this point and it is important to listen
to our community.
It seems reasonable that additional features can be added to OpenSim in a
somewhat cavalier fashion, and
Melanie wrote:
Then they simply mandate that users use the inventory provider
provided by the organization, and not allow HG protocols on the
grid. Always easier to take away than to add :)
That is unless, in the attempt to make hypergrid work securely, you
remove the ability for an
Mike Dickson wrote:
Yes, just voicing my opinion. And my concern is that you will prevent
me from running a walled garden in trying to get your inventory on the
client hypergrid model working.
As has been pointed out, the sources are BSD licensed, I could always
fork what's there and do my
This in itself is a flawed assumption. While OpenSim is certainly not intended
to be an SL clone, there has been *no*
statement from core that Hypergrid is the one true way forward for the future -
as far as I'm concerned it still has the
status of an experimental architecture. Some people
And you're being argumentative just to do it.
Look, OpenSim at least initially was all about the LL grid. Without a
client to access the simulator all the shiny server bits aren't terribly
useful. And there have been a number of starts at other clients. For
the most part however people who
These concerns are valid but technically unfounded. There is absolutely
no plans to remove what's already in OpenSim. There is simply the plan
to add more and generalize what's already in there. Whenever possible,
generalization is desirable; whenever the possibilities diverge, we add
more
Uh-Oh Diva,
Looks like your thread has been severely hijacked ;)
I think that what has occurred here is that passions have come to a boil,
little misunderstandings have become inflamed into causes of the moment, and
the initial goal of the thread has been lost in the chaos.
If I may try to steer
Then do it in your own repository and push changes back to core when
they're baked enough and have been reviewed. Lots of good examples of
that development model in open source projects. Though perhaps Justin
is right that there's not enough people in core to support that.
I hear of lots of
OK, I think I'm coming close to having the sharp definitions that I
think are necessary. They're slight variations of Melanie's, because
Melanie's are still coercing OSGrid-like grids to become something that
they aren't.
- Simulator trust domain: a set of simulators that trust each other,
That's exactly what I'm doing here.
Mike Dickson wrote:
Then do it in your own repository and push changes back to core when
they're baked enough and have been reviewed. Lots of good examples of
that development model in open source projects. Though perhaps Justin
is right that there's not
Diva went out of her way to put the original HyperGrid module on the forge.
After it had gained acceptance, *others* suggested to her that adding it to the
core part of OpenSim would be to our advantage.
We all voted on that and agreed this was the right thing to do.
There are other modules
With everyone interested in the concept of grids and future architecture design
I thought this would be a good time to present what I have been working on.
http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Image:Cablebeach-trustoverview.png
The important thing about worlds (grids) and trust domains is that you can
Wonderful job, Diva. I think we're onto something here.
- Simulator trust domain: a set of simulators that trust each other,
operated by one single authority
Sounds fine; akin or parallell to an 'estate' perhaps?
I propose the entity Resource Services: A set of zero or more
Greetings from an OpenSim user and web/lsl developer,
My interest is for OpenSim to be seen in the virtual world space as
Apache is to the web. As a longtime observer of Linux and Apache
(started working with web in 1993), I would say: above all, get
critical mass going for OpenSim. Be careful
Before you go into proposing a different development process for
OpenSim, make sure that you know what the current process is.
I don't see it on the Wiki, so maybe people don't know.
Mike Dickson wrote:
Yes, I recall all this. As I said, I think the Hypergrid stuff is
interesting work and I'm
Well, I know what I've observed over the last year and a half or so.
But I agree that having something in writing that could be referred to
would be a help.
Mike
On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 17:49 +, Diva Canto wrote:
Before you go into proposing a different development process for
OpenSim, make
Justin
Aside from the obvious benefit of plausible deniability I'm intrigued to
know what the benefit of keeping a development model oral only is? I
know you've said flexibility but in this context isn't a primary goal of
a development process to limit flexibility in a sensible way? Something
Stefan Andersson wrote:
I propose the entity Resource Services: A set of zero or more services
serving resources for regions. Resources include: assets, user
accounts, and assorted services like lookup services, forums, etc.
Good.
Am I correct in assuming that the hypergrid then boils
Alan M Webb wrote:
Justin
Aside from the obvious benefit of plausible deniability I'm intrigued to
know what the benefit of keeping a development model oral only is? I
know you've said flexibility but in this context isn't a primary goal
of a development process to limit flexibility in
Am I correct in assuming that the hypergrid then boils down to the
untrusted connections? What is left, basically.
Well, not quite. Given that a grid can contain several trust domains,
there may be untrusted connections even within a grid. For example,
Wright Plaza should not trust
Yes, that's exactly it. So to TP between DNCH and WP, the client would
have to do it.
Stefan Andersson wrote:
Am I correct in assuming that the hypergrid then boils down to the
untrusted connections? What is left, basically.
Well, not quite. Given that a grid can contain several
If you can represent that configuration, I'm all for it. I had left
it out because from where I stand it seemed hard or impossible to
support. If it;s possible, so much the better.
+1
Melanie
Diva Canto wrote:
OK, I think I'm coming close to having the sharp definitions that I
think are
Is this fixed?
Best regards,
Stefan Andersson
Tribal Media AB
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2009 12:42:45 +0100
From: ch...@codetorque.co.uk
To: opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Request for feedback: 0.6.5Release Candidate
1Prospects
Ah yes, this slipped through my tests
Personally I prefer OpenSim in standalone mode, and my preference is for it
to be a personal simulation server allowing multiple dissimilar clients to
attach and share a simulation; one which may deviate quite a but from the
normal SL experience. I realize I'm in a minority with this position
If we want to watch the birth of a so-called Web 3D, welcome Diva and
welcome Hypergrid.
If we want to have a clone of SL, but with the option of different
grids, welcome all development aid, including Hypergrid, as this is also
a dream of LL.
But if we only want to have a bad clone of the SL
Justin Clark-Casey wrote:
Sounds good to me (might be just easier to now go with this and amend later
if necessary).
As a small point, the Grid definition would appear to mean that our current
'Standalone' mode is confusingly also a
Grid.
Redefine/redeclare standalone as StandAloneGrid
Well... I rather suspect we are all headed for the same place, but, ... we seem
to be having some semantic 'challenges' lately.
I *know* that all the hearts are in the right place on this list and that all
we have to do is be understanding and supportive of each other.
The thing that has
I apologize to all community-dev members because I do not be politically
correct, but what I wrote in my previous post is exactly what I feel.
Ideia Boa
Charles Krinke wrote:
Well... I rather suspect we are all headed for the same place, but,
... we seem to be having some semantic
31 matches
Mail list logo
