Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions

[Anders Arnholm]

Glen Canaday wrote:
> anyone who is known to have seen the LL server code. They can't be sure 
> there's no LL-proprietary licensing stuff going on. See this: 
> http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Contributions_Policy
>
> ... all of which I can completely understand.
>   
No, the not reading viewer code in 6 mouths makes no sence at all. Makes 
the bug solutions a pain in the ass really. Any sencidle developer with 
two programs talking to each other, trying to solve a problem look at 
both codes. It does not break copyright laws.


> related. I'm actually rather surprised no one's said anything about the 
> merges of GPL code into viewer-internal. That bugged me more than the 
> TPV stuff.
>   

Sending in that fax and giveing the LL copyright for tha patches. We all 
knew that LL had an internal code base mixed with the server code 
containing non-gpl:ed code.


/ Balp

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0

[Latif Khalifa]

Hi,

On windows it fails with:

CMake Error at media_plugins/webkit/CMakeLists.txt:17 (include):
  include could not find load file:

PulseAudio

When I kill PulseAudio from cmake it fails with:

CMake Error in newview/CMakeLists.txt:
  Cannot find source file "llpopupview.cpp".  Tried extensions .c .C .c++ .cc

--  Latif

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut
 wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After much wrangling today and yesterday, I finally committed a massive
> commit syncing the SG2.0 trunk to viewer-external which is itself synced
> with Viewer 2.0:
> - Trac: http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/changeset/3303
> - Log: Merging of viewer-external from svn rev 3287 up to svn rev 3302 -
> Synced with official Viewer 2.0 then. Built and tested on Windows only!
>
> The build script have been failing for reasons I haven't investigated yet.
> I'll be working on that aspect first thing Monday morning.
>
> Cheers,
> - Merov
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0

[Jonathan Irvin]

Do we have an effective way of compiling the SnowGlobe viewer in Linux with
*.sh script? in debian?

Jonathan Irvin
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions

[Carlo Wood]

Ok, IANAL as well, but here's what I understood (somewhere in the past):

LL is a single legal entity, "distributing" sources internally is
not considered to be distribution and using binaries on multiple
PC's within the company is also not considered distribution (it
doesn't change owner).

Therefore, they can link GPL-ed code with non-GPL-ed code (ie the server).
The result would not be something that they can legally distribute, but
that is not being done when they keep it strictly internal.

If however they would sell (or even give) the server binary to another
company, that is something entirely different. In that case they may
not link with any GPL code, not even GPL shared libraries unless that
binary is GPL-ed, meaning that the receiving company also needs to get
source code, fully GPL-ed, which gives that company the right to
distribute it on the internet as well. If LL wouldd sell that binary and
give the source code but created an NDA for it; then they'd break
the law and could be sued by the copyright holder of the GPL-ed part
of their server (mostly like the FSF).

On Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 09:53:39AM +0200, Anders Arnholm wrote:
> Sending in that fax and giveing the LL copyright for tha patches. We all 
> knew that LL had an internal code base mixed with the server code 
> containing non-gpl:ed code.

-- 
Carlo Wood 
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0

[Robin Cornelius]

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 1:14 PM, Jonathan Irvin  wrote:
> Do we have an effective way of compiling the SnowGlobe viewer in Linux with
> *.sh script? in debian?
>

Normally yes, my debian source packages will build the snowglobe
viewer using the standard debian tools, but currently this is only
working on 1.X.

i've done some work on snowglobe 2.0 to fix some build issues, but
there are others that need resolving. The whole 2.0 build needs some
TLC  so it works with out major hiccups on common build
configurations. I need to go back through the SVN and see whats broken
and whats already patched in jira awaiting commit.

When things work correctly its two commands to build anyway but It
might be worth pushing my build scripts to a wiki for easy use by
others.

Robin
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0

[Boroondas Gupte]

On 04/03/2010 02:14 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> Do we have an effective way of compiling the SnowGlobe viewer in Linux
> with *.sh script? in debian?
A quick step-by-step instruction can be found at Compiling and Patching
Snowglobe (Linux)
.
A more detailed, but probably partially out of date documentation is at
Compiling the viewer (Linux)
.
There's also some CMake instructions for all platforms
 from Robin.

You could pack the commands listed there into a shell script, of course,
but after the initial setup you'll only need to issue make most of the
times, so there's no real need for that. The hard part is to get all the
dependencies. For debian specifically, some package names are listed on
the wiki. The source code

for Robin's debian packages might be interesting, too.

I don't know whether Henri's shell scripts

are still up to date, but they're certainly worth a look if you're
planning to do something similar.

I hope this helps.
cheers
Boroondas




___
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

[opensource-dev] PulseAudio requirement in windows question; Technical issue squeezed between legal noise.

[Nicky Perian]

Same issue as Latif.

On windows it fails with:

CMake Error at media_plugins/webkit/CMakeLists.txt:17 (include):
  include could not find load file:

PulseAudio


Is PulseAudio required for a windows build?



  ___
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

[opensource-dev] TPV - Nope

[Nicholaz Beresford]

Hi All!

Since the TPV and new TOS seems to be in effect now, I'd like to finally 
comment on it too.

For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who started the first 
thrird party viewer (in fact I made the original Wiki page
http://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Alternate_viewers&redirect=no) 
and as it appears I'm still the person with the most accepted patches to 
the viewer (except maybe SnowGlobe commits, I'm not sure if or how they 
are counted) and the winner of the year 2007 Linden OpenSource Award.

I have not made viewers in quite some time and have basically resigned 
over gripes about how the Lindens handle open source and the OS 
community in general, so I'm not sure if my words still have any weight 
(not that any resident's words have any weight with the Lindens, except 
Stroker Serpentine's maybe, when they are voiced through a lawyer or 
court).  So just take my words as coming from the elder statesman armchair.

However, I still had my account and a couple of alts, but this new 
TOS/TPV, now that's it's out of the box about to be in effect soon, puts 
the final nail into the coffin.

I'm not going to try to dissect what's written there or what the 
practical legal impact is.  Living in Germany with strong customer 
protection laws, legal impact in fact is most likely zilch, but what the 
TOS and the TPV does, is to show the Linden's view of their relationship 
beween themselves and their residents and OS developers.

While it's not a secret that I have been less than thrilled by their 
views and actions in the past, I find the TPV taking it to a new level.

It is their servers, their assets, their business.  But trying to use 
their power in a way like this, dictating the terms, making far reaching 
demands and lightly brushing off concerns is unacceptable.

Of course a viewer maker needs comply with the law, no TOS is needed for 
that.  But making demands like the branding (as if the word "Life" was 
their invention) or demanding disclosure like section 8d which goes far 
beyond any legal obligations is just way over the top for me.

I took their sources based on GPL once and at that time alternate 
viewers seemed to be welcome and later I even jumped through a few hoops 
to meet their new whims (e.g. complying with their trademark policies). 
  In the recent past, I have still used SL on occasion as a regular user 
and now, trying to use SL as a user, I'm finding myself being presented 
with new demands because my past viewers are still out there for download.

Am I going to agree to that?  No frigging way.  I certainly do not want 
to have any relationship with a company who is trying to use their 
position of power in a way like that, no matter if it's legally valid or 
not.  The new TOS/TPV defines who LL thinks they are and who they think 
their users are and what kinds of demands and claims LL thinks they can 
make or what they think is acceptable and fair.

I can only recommend to every viewer maker and contributor to have a 
look at this broader picture and evaluate if their contributions in time 
and efforts are worthwhile.   Mine where fun when LL was a different 
company, but there I no way I would have made contributions under the 
current terms.  In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms 
and have canceled my accounts today.


Nicholaz.


___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions

[Jesse Barnett]

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Carlo Wood  wrote:

> Ok, IANAL as well, but here's what I understood (somewhere in the past):
>
> LL is a single legal entity, "distributing" sources internally is
> not considered to be distribution and using binaries on multiple
> PC's within the company is also not considered distribution (it
> doesn't change owner).
>
> Therefore, they can link GPL-ed code with non-GPL-ed code (ie the server).
> The result would not be something that they can legally distribute, but
> that is not being done when they keep it strictly internal.
>
> If however they would sell (or even give) the server binary to another
> company, that is something entirely different. In that case they may
> not link with any GPL code, not even GPL shared libraries unless that
> binary is GPL-ed, meaning that the receiving company also needs to get
> source code, fully GPL-ed, which gives that company the right to
> distribute it on the internet as well. If LL wouldd sell that binary and
> give the source code but created an NDA for it; then they'd break
> the law and could be sued by the copyright holder of the GPL-ed part
> of their server (mostly like the FSF).
>
>
Not sure if that assessment is entirely correct. Rob Linden's greatest
strength (besides his extraordinary patience) was the ability to explain
things in a way so that anyone could understand. He did an excellent blog
post last month about dual licensing and contribution agreements that should
be required reading for everyone:

http://blog.robla.net/2010/thoughts-on-dual-licensing-and-contrib-agreements/

Jesse Barnett
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions

[Michael Dickson]

Excellent summary by Rob. I was going to write a follow up but Rob's
post was pretty complete.  The short of it is that because of the
contributor agreements LL owns the copyright on all contributions
including their own and can use them pretty much how they see fit,
including in commercial code that may never be released opensource.
They can't remove the GPL from contributions that are accepted into the
opensource tree or on their own GPL'd sources. Those remain available
under the GPL.

You can argue they shouldn't do that but as the article Rob did suggests
software is valued as and deals like MySQL and such depend on the
ability to sell something as IP possibly as a closed source offering.
IMO, its that ability that funds much of the large project opensource
thats done.

Mike

On Sat, 2010-04-03 at 14:12 +, Jesse Barnett wrote:
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:30 AM, Carlo Wood  wrote:
> Ok, IANAL as well, but here's what I understood (somewhere in
> the past):
> 
> LL is a single legal entity, "distributing" sources internally
> is
> not considered to be distribution and using binaries on
> multiple
> PC's within the company is also not considered distribution
> (it
> doesn't change owner).
> 
> Therefore, they can link GPL-ed code with non-GPL-ed code (ie
> the server).
> The result would not be something that they can legally
> distribute, but
> that is not being done when they keep it strictly internal.
> 
> If however they would sell (or even give) the server binary to
> another
> company, that is something entirely different. In that case
> they may
> not link with any GPL code, not even GPL shared libraries
> unless that
> binary is GPL-ed, meaning that the receiving company also
> needs to get
> source code, fully GPL-ed, which gives that company the right
> to
> distribute it on the internet as well. If LL wouldd sell that
> binary and
> give the source code but created an NDA for it; then they'd
> break
> the law and could be sued by the copyright holder of the
> GPL-ed part
> of their server (mostly like the FSF).
> 
> 
> 
> Not sure if that assessment is entirely correct. Rob Linden's greatest
> strength (besides his extraordinary patience) was the ability to
> explain things in a way so that anyone could understand. He did an
> excellent blog post last month about dual licensing and contribution
> agreements that should be required reading for everyone:
> 
> http://blog.robla.net/2010/thoughts-on-dual-licensing-and-contrib-agreements/
> 
> Jesse Barnett


___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0

[Jonathan Irvin]

Thanks for the help all, I will look into this later >.>

Jonathan Irvin
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] PulseAudio requirement in windows question; Technical issue squeezed between legal noise.

[Tayra Dagostino]

On Sat, 3 Apr 2010 06:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
Nicky Perian  wrote:

> Same issue as Latif.
> 
> On windows it fails with:
> 
> CMake Error at media_plugins/webkit/CMakeLists.txt:17 (include):
>   include could not find load file:
> 
> PulseAudio
> 
> 
> Is PulseAudio required for a windows build?

on linux too, maybe a lib is missing by automatic fetcher. (i have
my pulseaudio-dev package installed)
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope

[Jonathan Irvin]

While I didn't know you personally, it takes a lot for someone to have your
opinions, come to your conclusions, and then cancel your accounts.  Sad to
see another oldbie go.

Jonathan Irvin

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 08:51, Nicholaz Beresford wrote:

>
> Hi All!
>
> Since the TPV and new TOS seems to be in effect now, I'd like to finally
> comment on it too.
>
> For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who started the first
> thrird party viewer (in fact I made the original Wiki page
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Alternate_viewers&redirect=no
> )
> and as it appears I'm still the person with the most accepted patches to
> the viewer (except maybe SnowGlobe commits, I'm not sure if or how they
> are counted) and the winner of the year 2007 Linden OpenSource Award.
>
> I have not made viewers in quite some time and have basically resigned
> over gripes about how the Lindens handle open source and the OS
> community in general, so I'm not sure if my words still have any weight
> (not that any resident's words have any weight with the Lindens, except
> Stroker Serpentine's maybe, when they are voiced through a lawyer or
> court).  So just take my words as coming from the elder statesman armchair.
>
> However, I still had my account and a couple of alts, but this new
> TOS/TPV, now that's it's out of the box about to be in effect soon, puts
> the final nail into the coffin.
>
> I'm not going to try to dissect what's written there or what the
> practical legal impact is.  Living in Germany with strong customer
> protection laws, legal impact in fact is most likely zilch, but what the
> TOS and the TPV does, is to show the Linden's view of their relationship
> beween themselves and their residents and OS developers.
>
> While it's not a secret that I have been less than thrilled by their
> views and actions in the past, I find the TPV taking it to a new level.
>
> It is their servers, their assets, their business.  But trying to use
> their power in a way like this, dictating the terms, making far reaching
> demands and lightly brushing off concerns is unacceptable.
>
> Of course a viewer maker needs comply with the law, no TOS is needed for
> that.  But making demands like the branding (as if the word "Life" was
> their invention) or demanding disclosure like section 8d which goes far
> beyond any legal obligations is just way over the top for me.
>
> I took their sources based on GPL once and at that time alternate
> viewers seemed to be welcome and later I even jumped through a few hoops
> to meet their new whims (e.g. complying with their trademark policies).
>  In the recent past, I have still used SL on occasion as a regular user
> and now, trying to use SL as a user, I'm finding myself being presented
> with new demands because my past viewers are still out there for download.
>
> Am I going to agree to that?  No frigging way.  I certainly do not want
> to have any relationship with a company who is trying to use their
> position of power in a way like that, no matter if it's legally valid or
> not.  The new TOS/TPV defines who LL thinks they are and who they think
> their users are and what kinds of demands and claims LL thinks they can
> make or what they think is acceptable and fair.
>
> I can only recommend to every viewer maker and contributor to have a
> look at this broader picture and evaluate if their contributions in time
> and efforts are worthwhile.   Mine where fun when LL was a different
> company, but there I no way I would have made contributions under the
> current terms.  In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms
> and have canceled my accounts today.
>
>
> Nicholaz.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope

[Marine Kelley]

This is a sad day. I remember the times when you were indeed the most
prolific contributor, when your own third-party viewer was the toast of SL,
and the SL viewer has benefited greatly from your work. I think everyone can
thank you for that (and everyone has !).

And I'd like to thank you for helping me get started on my project back in
the days.

Best of luck for whatever next project you will work on,
Marine


On 3 April 2010 15:51, Nicholaz Beresford  wrote:

>
> Hi All!
>
> Since the TPV and new TOS seems to be in effect now, I'd like to finally
> comment on it too.
>
> For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who started the first
> thrird party viewer (in fact I made the original Wiki page
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Alternate_viewers&redirect=no
> )
> and as it appears I'm still the person with the most accepted patches to
> the viewer (except maybe SnowGlobe commits, I'm not sure if or how they
> are counted) and the winner of the year 2007 Linden OpenSource Award.
>
> I have not made viewers in quite some time and have basically resigned
> over gripes about how the Lindens handle open source and the OS
> community in general, so I'm not sure if my words still have any weight
> (not that any resident's words have any weight with the Lindens, except
> Stroker Serpentine's maybe, when they are voiced through a lawyer or
> court).  So just take my words as coming from the elder statesman armchair.
>
> However, I still had my account and a couple of alts, but this new
> TOS/TPV, now that's it's out of the box about to be in effect soon, puts
> the final nail into the coffin.
>
> I'm not going to try to dissect what's written there or what the
> practical legal impact is.  Living in Germany with strong customer
> protection laws, legal impact in fact is most likely zilch, but what the
> TOS and the TPV does, is to show the Linden's view of their relationship
> beween themselves and their residents and OS developers.
>
> While it's not a secret that I have been less than thrilled by their
> views and actions in the past, I find the TPV taking it to a new level.
>
> It is their servers, their assets, their business.  But trying to use
> their power in a way like this, dictating the terms, making far reaching
> demands and lightly brushing off concerns is unacceptable.
>
> Of course a viewer maker needs comply with the law, no TOS is needed for
> that.  But making demands like the branding (as if the word "Life" was
> their invention) or demanding disclosure like section 8d which goes far
> beyond any legal obligations is just way over the top for me.
>
> I took their sources based on GPL once and at that time alternate
> viewers seemed to be welcome and later I even jumped through a few hoops
> to meet their new whims (e.g. complying with their trademark policies).
>  In the recent past, I have still used SL on occasion as a regular user
> and now, trying to use SL as a user, I'm finding myself being presented
> with new demands because my past viewers are still out there for download.
>
> Am I going to agree to that?  No frigging way.  I certainly do not want
> to have any relationship with a company who is trying to use their
> position of power in a way like that, no matter if it's legally valid or
> not.  The new TOS/TPV defines who LL thinks they are and who they think
> their users are and what kinds of demands and claims LL thinks they can
> make or what they think is acceptable and fair.
>
> I can only recommend to every viewer maker and contributor to have a
> look at this broader picture and evaluate if their contributions in time
> and efforts are worthwhile.   Mine where fun when LL was a different
> company, but there I no way I would have made contributions under the
> current terms.  In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms
> and have canceled my accounts today.
>
>
> Nicholaz.
>
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope

[Moriz Gupte]

Thanks Nicholaz for your hardwork. I used your viewer a lot to bypass issues
I had then with the standard viewer. I think Linden Lab was s lucky to
have had such a vibrant community in place. From my point of view, I see a
slow erosion of veteran well known content creators and client developers. I
think LL probably has a better view of things...may be there see things that
we can't. The media is still interested in LL as an article to be published
in the Wallstreet journal (in a couple of weeks or so) soon will prove. But
I have concerns about the future. LL will survive not because of excellence
but because of poor and fragmented competition. Btw I went into lurking mode
because it was clear to me that only folks that submit patches were
encouraged to speak. Many like myself have enough background to contribute
patches...but I chose to focus on content creation (and my contribution so
far has only been through virtual learning environment design). So back to
lurking.
R

On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Marine Kelley wrote:

> This is a sad day. I remember the times when you were indeed the most
> prolific contributor, when your own third-party viewer was the toast of SL,
> and the SL viewer has benefited greatly from your work. I think everyone can
> thank you for that (and everyone has !).
>
> And I'd like to thank you for helping me get started on my project back in
> the days.
>
> Best of luck for whatever next project you will work on,
> Marine
>
>
>
> On 3 April 2010 15:51, Nicholaz Beresford  wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi All!
>>
>> Since the TPV and new TOS seems to be in effect now, I'd like to finally
>> comment on it too.
>>
>> For those of you who don't know me, I'm the person who started the first
>> thrird party viewer (in fact I made the original Wiki page
>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/w/index.php?title=Alternate_viewers&redirect=no
>> )
>> and as it appears I'm still the person with the most accepted patches to
>> the viewer (except maybe SnowGlobe commits, I'm not sure if or how they
>> are counted) and the winner of the year 2007 Linden OpenSource Award.
>>
>> I have not made viewers in quite some time and have basically resigned
>> over gripes about how the Lindens handle open source and the OS
>> community in general, so I'm not sure if my words still have any weight
>> (not that any resident's words have any weight with the Lindens, except
>> Stroker Serpentine's maybe, when they are voiced through a lawyer or
>> court).  So just take my words as coming from the elder statesman
>> armchair.
>>
>> However, I still had my account and a couple of alts, but this new
>> TOS/TPV, now that's it's out of the box about to be in effect soon, puts
>> the final nail into the coffin.
>>
>> I'm not going to try to dissect what's written there or what the
>> practical legal impact is.  Living in Germany with strong customer
>> protection laws, legal impact in fact is most likely zilch, but what the
>> TOS and the TPV does, is to show the Linden's view of their relationship
>> beween themselves and their residents and OS developers.
>>
>> While it's not a secret that I have been less than thrilled by their
>> views and actions in the past, I find the TPV taking it to a new level.
>>
>> It is their servers, their assets, their business.  But trying to use
>> their power in a way like this, dictating the terms, making far reaching
>> demands and lightly brushing off concerns is unacceptable.
>>
>> Of course a viewer maker needs comply with the law, no TOS is needed for
>> that.  But making demands like the branding (as if the word "Life" was
>> their invention) or demanding disclosure like section 8d which goes far
>> beyond any legal obligations is just way over the top for me.
>>
>> I took their sources based on GPL once and at that time alternate
>> viewers seemed to be welcome and later I even jumped through a few hoops
>> to meet their new whims (e.g. complying with their trademark policies).
>>  In the recent past, I have still used SL on occasion as a regular user
>> and now, trying to use SL as a user, I'm finding myself being presented
>> with new demands because my past viewers are still out there for download.
>>
>> Am I going to agree to that?  No frigging way.  I certainly do not want
>> to have any relationship with a company who is trying to use their
>> position of power in a way like that, no matter if it's legally valid or
>> not.  The new TOS/TPV defines who LL thinks they are and who they think
>> their users are and what kinds of demands and claims LL thinks they can
>> make or what they think is acceptable and fair.
>>
>> I can only recommend to every viewer maker and contributor to have a
>> look at this broader picture and evaluate if their contributions in time
>> and efforts are worthwhile.   Mine where fun when LL was a different
>> company, but there I no way I would have made contributions under the
>> current terms.  In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms
>> and hav

Re: [opensource-dev] Can we, open source devs, still support Snowglobe? was: Can we be more productive, please?

[Thickbrick Sleaford]

On Friday 02 April 2010 16:36:45 Aleric Inglewood wrote:

> Who of the active contributors (speak up if I missed you) are willing to
> make a stand and stop at least developing for snowglobe, unless we
> get a clear, understandable and official explanation what kind of legal
> liability TPV devs are facing? Don't you think we owe that to the other
> open developers that do not work on snowglobe, but on some TPV?
> 

I don't know if the TPV policy (agreement, really) really does expose 
developers to additional liability, but I don't know that it doesn't either. 
That is a BIG problem for hobbyist developers who are not going to hire  a 
lawyer to decipher the agreement for them.

I hope someone in a position to make policy decisions at LL asks the question 
of whether LL is interested in the existence of an open source community of 
(largely hobbyist) viewer developers, or is it content with having source that 
is open and a few business partners who use that source.

If the answer is the former, then this can be easily fixed by sending that 
document for another iteration to the lawyer who drafted it, with the 
instructions to make the problematic clauses clear in both English and 
Legalese.

Personally, even though I'm not directly affected by this agreement (it 
explicitly excludes Snowglobe), I don't see much point in continuing my 
involvement in this open source process if TPV developers were to be shut out 
of it.

This is very unfortunate since we are just now seeing the fruits of a large 
Linden effort (by Merov and others) to open the development process. This is 
is something we have been asking for for a long time, and deserves to be 
lauded publicly, not rewarded with the current opensource-dev drama.

This investment of time and effort by LL leads me to think that disruption of 
the open source community is NOT what this policy was intended to do.

Hoping this will be resolved soon,
-- 
Thickbrick
___
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

[opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available

[Dzonatas Sol]

This is a build of Snowglobe with SNOW-375 patch applied. This patch 
provides a HTTP/REST interface to control and automate the Snowglobe 
viewer. Client-side scripts and programs can then add features like 
accessibility functions, automated regression tests, detached editors, 
separate chat windows, inventory organizers, and more.

Linux: 
http://mono.dzonux.net/file/Snowglobe375/Snowglobe-i686-1.4-375.tar.bz2 


Source: http://gitweb.dzonux.net/?p=snowglobe-1.4-375.git 


See Also: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375



You can experience how such an HTTP/REST interface performs with 
Icesphere, which was the project formerly known as MonoVida Studio and 
MonoVida Communicator.Icesphere interfaces with Snowglobe-375 to present 
detached communications and client-side scripting via C#/Mono/.NET.

http://mono.dzonux.net/file/Snowglobe375/communicator.zip

Note: name change not due to pun on grid monkeys =)


___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope

[Jonathan Irvin]

I'd just like to point out to *everyone* that I truly admire the spirit you
all have towards this project and SL in general.  Personally, I've stuck
with SL this long just because I've always found it as a medium of
experimentation and exploration of different programming ideals and
methods.  I can truly say I learned a lot of my programming from my
experiments in SL.  Still to this day I learn new things and experiment with
different techniques.

Many things I do in SL are "hrm that would be cool" or "I wonder if people
could use this if I made it".  So, in large part, SL is a hobby for me.
Then again, there is a business aspect to what I do, but mainly the business
aspect is to offset the Lindens my wife buys from USD and burns up on
shopping in SL lol.

Jonathan Irvin
___
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

[opensource-dev] Compressed Object Updates.

[Chandra K Kuchi]

Hello All,

When will server start sending ObjectUpdateCompressed messages?
Does client need to send any request message?

Thanks for your help.

-- 
Regards,
Chandra K Kuchi
___
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

[opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?

[Dale Mahalko]

I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time
this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit
internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg


Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line,
the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and
the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not
telling me the status of the OSgrid instead?

On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5
minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes.

Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd
think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the
collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics
engines, but oh well.

When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search
window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports
fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept
connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the
search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that
don't accept connections.)

Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing.
How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and
pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows
about a 10x10 grid of sims nearby, but the rest of the map doesn't
want to load. Timeout.

I did actually manage to find another OSgrid sim to connect to, but on
join it turned out to have a ping of 6000. (It would be useful for the
search page to show a graph of the sim load for the last five minutes
so we know if a sim is lagged out BEFORE we try teleporting.)

And oh joy, I can't now "teleport home" to where I started. The OSgrid
did something I've not seen happen on SL in a long time, where I seem
to still be connected but all the traffic meters in the client debug
(Ctrl-Shift-1) drop to 0 kbps.

The inventory never loaded completely, even though as a new user it's empty.

Relogin attempts attempting to login at the home location were just as
slow and unresponsive.


Yep, if you don't like the new SL client developer TOS, there is sure
a great future to look forward to with the open source grid project.
:-P
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?

[FoxSan Yosuké]

*plays a tiny violin*

Have a great weekend :)


2010/4/4 Dale Mahalko 

> I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time
> this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit
> internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg
>
>
> Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line,
> the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and
> the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not
> telling me the status of the OSgrid instead?
>
> On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5
> minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes.
>
> Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd
> think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the
> collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics
> engines, but oh well.
>
> When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search
> window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports
> fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept
> connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the
> search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that
> don't accept connections.)
>
> Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing.
> How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and
> pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows
> about a 10x10 grid of sims nearby, but the rest of the map doesn't
> want to load. Timeout.
>
> I did actually manage to find another OSgrid sim to connect to, but on
> join it turned out to have a ping of 6000. (It would be useful for the
> search page to show a graph of the sim load for the last five minutes
> so we know if a sim is lagged out BEFORE we try teleporting.)
>
> And oh joy, I can't now "teleport home" to where I started. The OSgrid
> did something I've not seen happen on SL in a long time, where I seem
> to still be connected but all the traffic meters in the client debug
> (Ctrl-Shift-1) drop to 0 kbps.
>
> The inventory never loaded completely, even though as a new user it's
> empty.
>
> Relogin attempts attempting to login at the home location were just as
> slow and unresponsive.
>
>
> Yep, if you don't like the new SL client developer TOS, there is sure
> a great future to look forward to with the open source grid project.
> :-P
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?

[Maya Remblai]

You tried one grid out of...20? Maybe more? Not really a fair benchmark. :P

They're all different, and some are better than others. My personal new 
home is InWorldz. Reaction Grid performs well as well. OSGrid has the 
benefit of self-hosting, but that's a problem as well, as you saw. Many 
grids only run standard OpenSim software without any modifications, also 
a problem. There's a small discussion about OS grids here:

http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/opensim-discussion/42250-list-working-opensim-grids.html

Maya

Dale Mahalko wrote:
> I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time
> this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit
> internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg
>
>
> Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line,
> the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and
> the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not
> telling me the status of the OSgrid instead?
>
> On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5
> minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes.
>
> Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd
> think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the
> collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics
> engines, but oh well.
>
> When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search
> window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports
> fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept
> connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the
> search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that
> don't accept connections.)
>
> Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing.
> How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and
> pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows
> about a 10x10 grid of sims nearby, but the rest of the map doesn't
> want to load. Timeout.
>
> I did actually manage to find another OSgrid sim to connect to, but on
> join it turned out to have a ping of 6000. (It would be useful for the
> search page to show a graph of the sim load for the last five minutes
> so we know if a sim is lagged out BEFORE we try teleporting.)
>
> And oh joy, I can't now "teleport home" to where I started. The OSgrid
> did something I've not seen happen on SL in a long time, where I seem
> to still be connected but all the traffic meters in the client debug
> (Ctrl-Shift-1) drop to 0 kbps.
>
> The inventory never loaded completely, even though as a new user it's empty.
>
> Relogin attempts attempting to login at the home location were just as
> slow and unresponsive.
>
>
> Yep, if you don't like the new SL client developer TOS, there is sure
> a great future to look forward to with the open source grid project.
> :-P
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid?

[Andromeda Quonset]

Indeed.

You should see how far behind the scripting language is.

Here is a question I've always wondered:  is LSL  and/or Linden 
Scripting Language a trademark?  It isn't listed in the trademark page.

Andro

At 12:49 AM 4/4/2010, you wrote:
>I just tried using the SL 1.x client with OS grid for the first time
>this weekend. Overall the experience was plain awful, on a 10 megabit
>internet connection and GTX 285 1024meg
>
>
>Oddly, when giving the SL client the OSgrid URL from the command line,
>the client login page tells me that the Second Life grid is up, and
>the number of concurrent users in SL, etc. Why is the client not
>telling me the status of the OSgrid instead?
>
>On first login, the sim textures took forever to load. Like, after 5
>minutes I'm still standing in a sea of gray boxes.
>
>Simple physics only with the ground. All objects are phantom. I'd
>think the OSGrid default login would want to showcase the
>collision-resolving capabilities of the more advanced open physics
>engines, but oh well.
>
>When I search for sandboxes to try building stuff... odd, the search
>window shows me stuff from Second Life, not the OSGrid. Most teleports
>fail because it appears I'm getting links to SL sims that don't accept
>connections from OSGrid. Yep, I can find the Cordova Sandbox from the
>search page within OSGrid. (I don't think search should list sims that
>don't accept connections.)
>
>Searching for "osgrid" in the search window oddly turns up nothing.
>How am I to find sandbox sims in OSGrid? "Oh, just open the map and
>pick that way" someone tells me. Yeah that works well. the map shows
>about a 10x10 grid of sims nearby, but the rest of the map doesn't
>want to load. Timeout.
>
>I did actually manage to find another OSgrid sim to connect to, but on
>join it turned out to have a ping of 6000. (It would be useful for the
>search page to show a graph of the sim load for the last five minutes
>so we know if a sim is lagged out BEFORE we try teleporting.)
>
>And oh joy, I can't now "teleport home" to where I started. The OSgrid
>did something I've not seen happen on SL in a long time, where I seem
>to still be connected but all the traffic meters in the client debug
>(Ctrl-Shift-1) drop to 0 kbps.
>
>The inventory never loaded completely, even though as a new user it's empty.
>
>Relogin attempts attempting to login at the home location were just as
>slow and unresponsive.
>
>
>Yep, if you don't like the new SL client developer TOS, there is sure
>a great future to look forward to with the open source grid project.
>:-P

___
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