Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes
On 25.02.2012 01:18, Jessica Lyon wrote: > Actually, under 2.k, features like breast physics, secondary attachments, > shared parcel WL etc, would have never been permitted to exist. And this > means that any feature in the future to which a TPV > may conjur up, which effects the shared experience (Ie. something one user > could see but another couldn't) will need to be developed for the LL viewer > by TPV devs, accepted by LL, released by LL > before a TPV may release it themselves. Another example would be the Mesh > deformer from Qarl, if LL were not interested in it.. none of us would be > allowed to release it in our viewers. Yah. I guess Oscars meetings will be crowded now with people asking if this or that is policy compliant or not. So there should be more Lindens at the meeting probably, having answers to that. Cause a "dont know" or "have to ask" or "we have to consider yet" as response wont help at all and make work for TPV devs impossible. Tillie ___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
Hello Oskar, > 2.k You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the > virtual world in > any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden > Lab viewer. Ah hm... - What about text based viewers? - What about viewers on mobile devices? - What about special viewers for disabled people, that may have quite some different representation of everything? Or someone's just trying to connect a C64 virtual machine based viewer to SL, with its own, quite unique representation. What about that? The "shared experience" of all those is quite different from the LL viewer. And more: - What about the shared experience of very old LL viewers? Not allowed to copy/clone if its not in the "latest released Linden Lab viewer"? - What about LL viewers in DEV or BETA status? Have TPV devs to wait till a feature is officially out? Is there any grace period till the new policy is enforced? What about grace periods on client changes later, LL client removes something, do TPV devs have to remove it instantly, too (dont say now there is nothing being removed, I remember Avatar Ratings, for example). Tillie ___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
What I am worrying about is that this will also go against RLV, which is in wide use, even outside the Adult community.(We use it for some of our combat systems). LL, are you really trying to force people to use your client and piss off most of SL userbase? I haven't seen such a terrible move since M Linden was in charge. On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Tillie Ariantho wrote: > Hello Oskar, > > > 2.k You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience > of the virtual world in > > any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released > Linden Lab viewer. > > Ah hm... > > - What about text based viewers? > - What about viewers on mobile devices? > - What about special viewers for disabled people, that may have quite some > different representation of everything? > > Or someone's just trying to connect a C64 virtual machine based viewer to > SL, with its own, quite unique representation. What about that? > > The "shared experience" of all those is quite different from the LL viewer. > > And more: > > - What about the shared experience of very old LL viewers? Not allowed to > copy/clone if its not in the "latest released Linden Lab viewer"? > - What about LL viewers in DEV or BETA status? Have TPV devs to wait till > a feature is officially out? > > Is there any grace period till the new policy is enforced? What about > grace periods on client changes later, LL client removes something, > do TPV devs have to remove it instantly, too (dont say now there is > nothing being removed, I remember Avatar Ratings, for example). > > Tillie > ___ > 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 > -- Have a nice day, Skye Menjou ___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
I was wondering the same thing. On 25/02/2012, Skye Menjou wrote: > What I am worrying about is that this will also go against RLV, which is in > wide use, even outside the Adult community.(We use it for some of our > combat systems). > LL, are you really trying to force people to use your client and piss off > most of SL userbase? I haven't seen such a terrible move since M Linden was > in charge. > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Tillie Ariantho wrote: > >> Hello Oskar, >> >> > 2.k You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience >> of the virtual world in >> > any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released >> Linden Lab viewer. >> >> Ah hm... >> >> - What about text based viewers? >> - What about viewers on mobile devices? >> - What about special viewers for disabled people, that may have quite some >> different representation of everything? >> >> Or someone's just trying to connect a C64 virtual machine based viewer to >> SL, with its own, quite unique representation. What about that? >> >> The "shared experience" of all those is quite different from the LL >> viewer. >> >> And more: >> >> - What about the shared experience of very old LL viewers? Not allowed to >> copy/clone if its not in the "latest released Linden Lab viewer"? >> - What about LL viewers in DEV or BETA status? Have TPV devs to wait till >> a feature is officially out? >> >> Is there any grace period till the new policy is enforced? What about >> grace periods on client changes later, LL client removes something, >> do TPV devs have to remove it instantly, too (dont say now there is >> nothing being removed, I remember Avatar Ratings, for example). >> >> Tillie >> ___ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > Have a nice day, > Skye Menjou > ___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
I'm pretty sure RLV doesn't modify the shared experience. Any feature of it that others can see will observe it in the same way as the official viewer. Perhaps I am interpreting this incorrectly? This rule will avoid thing like the original double attachments that main viewer saw incorrectly, or that OTR chat encryption thing. It wouldn't disallow derendering, since others on TPV's and others on official see it the same way (ie, they both see nothing happen at all and it doesn't violate privacy) Basically, as an official viewer user, "Don't invade my privacy, don't make me see the world incorrectly." Correct me if wrong. On Feb 25, 2012, at 11:56 AM, Skye Menjou wrote: > What I am worrying about is that this will also go against RLV, which is in > wide use, even outside the Adult community.(We use it for some of our combat > systems). > LL, are you really trying to force people to use your client and piss off > most of SL userbase? I haven't seen such a terrible move since M Linden was > in charge. > > On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 1:08 PM, Tillie Ariantho wrote: > Hello Oskar, > > > 2.k You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of > > the virtual world in > > any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released > > Linden Lab viewer. > > Ah hm... > > - What about text based viewers? > - What about viewers on mobile devices? > - What about special viewers for disabled people, that may have quite some > different representation of everything? > > Or someone's just trying to connect a C64 virtual machine based viewer to SL, > with its own, quite unique representation. What about that? > > The "shared experience" of all those is quite different from the LL viewer. > > And more: > > - What about the shared experience of very old LL viewers? Not allowed to > copy/clone if its not in the "latest released Linden Lab viewer"? > - What about LL viewers in DEV or BETA status? Have TPV devs to wait till a > feature is officially out? > > Is there any grace period till the new policy is enforced? What about grace > periods on client changes later, LL client removes something, > do TPV devs have to remove it instantly, too (dont say now there is nothing > being removed, I remember Avatar Ratings, for example). > > Tillie > ___ > 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 > > > > -- > Have a nice day, > Skye Menjou > > > ___ > 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] Viewer Policy Changes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 2/25/2012 4:08 AM, Tillie Ariantho wrote: > - What about text based viewers? - What about viewers on mobile > devices? - What about special viewers for disabled people, that may > have quite some different representation of everything? > > - What about the shared experience of very old LL viewers? Not > allowed to copy/clone if its not in the "latest released Linden Lab > viewer"? - What about LL viewers in DEV or BETA status? Have TPV > devs to wait till a feature is officially out? Same thing for out dated 3d viewers, not having current features or features that would be considered basic (like mesh or view of the world in 3d at all) has never been against the TVPD policy and still isn't. 2.k is regarding adding things that change it. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJPSTAqAAoJEIdLfPRu7qE29CYH/2cr+BMWqVdBcC/HUoUI+iDL NskVMTFz/q6OaCd8pBdHtmcGn2OIVfc8TtOV07Rua/aQh6EYwSSNQNiO0P6DvWqM p7Bdnuh48tXyA6jrWPMLDnylmiCYVlAzBE7K/FSE5dZ2Qa3B3RNKOoJi0acmBESy FwZVEJGEYN2Xne45DGty7Vywjne+VgK+6eblpxRw5WXaX4a9R38EQCCEeBUh9OJ0 p+x55EQzdyLMo0hOwuvZgIJ87VQ5HDeSHDnmOnklavZiKdYEKCEfSDNnE+VraNnH MqjIj/isi42YjHCi7Tp7Wyb89h8D0rJMOXhF6bdraZNVHunZ3uDKrv11M3ck2Ds= =FIGX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ 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] data_online's new requirements
I've heard DATA_ONLINE will now only work for "the owner or the creator" of the script. Shouldn't that be instead "owner or compiler" of the script? Any full permission script already written could be used and recoded as a status finder, and I have a feeling this will be what people move to for stalking if it goes by script creator.___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
On 25.02.2012 19:24, Adeon Writer wrote: > It wouldn't disallow derendering, since others on TPV's and others on > official see it the same way (ie, they both see nothing happen at all and it > doesn't violate privacy) Derendering is essential for photographers, if there is thise newbie blocking the sight onto something important during a show. It helps a lot to do my work. Tillie ___ 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] data_online's new requirements
100% agreed! From: adeonwri...@live.com To: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com Date: Sat, 25 Feb 2012 15:21:04 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] data_online's new requirements I've heard DATA_ONLINE will now only work for "the owner or the creator" of the script. Shouldn't that be instead "owner or compiler" of the script? Any full permission script already written could be used and recoded as a status finder, and I have a feeling this will be what people move to for stalking if it goes by script creator. ___ 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] Viewer Policy Changes
On Sat, 25 Feb 2012 22:11:19 +0100 Tillie Ariantho wrote: > On 25.02.2012 19:24, Adeon Writer wrote: > > > It wouldn't disallow derendering, since others on TPV's and others > > on official see it the same way (ie, they both see nothing happen > > at all and it doesn't violate privacy) > > > Derendering is essential for photographers, if there is thise newbie > blocking the sight onto something important during a show. It helps a > lot to do my work. i think this LL's update mean not this kind of things but the ability of other to enjoy SL, if you derender somebody don't affect else than you, like other feature to increase the usability. About portable device and else is the same: if the software render the avy fine inworld (without give 3D on display, like pocket metaverse can rez and rebake too the avy inworld without offer 3D graphic) there are no problem (but this mean all textual client must include code to don't annoy others with clouds or ruth avy for other). Same RLV, affect YOUR way to "live" on SL, but others aren't affected. imho this update mean the "added" feature to TPV viewers like old emerald's extra attachment points (usable by who own the viewer but annoying for other bc see floating attachment around) or... maybe, for full 3D viewer mean not anymore no-mesh viewers (no-mesh viewers show a distorted and broken enviroment to who is around the affected user). alla bove under a giant "imho" umbrella, all we must wait office hour for clarification and explanation :) ___ 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] data_online's new requirements
> > I've heard DATA_ONLINE will now only work for "the owner or the creator" of > the script. Shouldn't that be instead "owner or compiler" of the script? Any > full permission script already written could be used and recoded as a status > finder, and I have a feeling this will be what people move to for stalking if > it goes by script creator. I share this concern whole heartedly. The idea of compiler instead of creator is a good one, I think. -- Ima Mechanique ima.mechanique(at)blueyonder.co.uk ___ 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
