Re: [opensource-dev] Review Request: Restructure loops that use breaks without need (reviewboard test)

[Gigs]

I'm getting "To protect your privacy, Thunderbird has blocked remote 
content."   Why do the message include external images?  As well because 
the "From" field is a person and not the list, I would have to whitelist 
every contributor to get rid of the message.

On 12/02/2010 12:05 PM, Thickbrick Sleaford wrote:
>
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> http://codereview.secondlife.com/r/2/
>
>
> indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp
> 
> (Diff revision 1)
>
> bool LLAppViewer::mainLoop()
>
> 1184  
>
>   const  F64  max_idle_time  =  
> llmin(.005*10.0*gFrameTimeSeconds,  0.005);  // 5 ms a second
>
>   1184
>
>   const  F64  max_idle_time  =  
> llmin(.005*10.0*gFrameTimeSeconds,  0.005);  // 5 ms a second
>
> Somewhat tangential to this patch: this line is wrong. It should use 
> gFrameIntervalSeconds, not gFarmeTimeSeconds. As it is, max_idle_time will 
> always be clamped to 0.005.
>
> The comment is also wrong/outdated. It should be something like"50 ms/second, 
> up to 5 ms/frame."
>
>
> - Thickbrick
>
>
> On December 1st, 2010, 7:57 p.m., Oz Linden wrote:
>
> Review request for Viewer.
> By Oz Linden.
>
> /Updated 2010-12-01 19:57:24/
>
>
>   Description
>
> This review is mostly a first test of reviewboard.
>
> I do have an esthetic dislike for the'break'  statement anywhere but as the 
> end of a case, so I chose to change some instances of break usage that were 
> not justified by any extreme need.
>
>
>   Testing
>
> None at all... have not even compiled it yet.
>
> *Bugs: * storm-606 
>
>
>   Diffs
>
> * indra/newview/llappviewer.cpp (bf98b026bcb1)
>
> View Diff 
>
>
>
> ___
> 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] Draft update to the Contribution Agreement

[Gigs]

It is customary to include addresses of the parties on contracts in the 
USA.  With only a name and signature, I could always claim it was some 
other Jason Giglio that agreed to the contract.

There aren't many ways to enter a binding contract without risking 
"outing", since for it to stand up in court, it has to positively 
identify that party who actually agreed to it.

The phone number could probably be dispensed with, and I doubt Linden 
Lab would reject your contributors agreement if you just wrote "no 
phone" in there.  It's not unprecedented that someone might not have a 
phone number these days.

Regarding compulsory patent licensing, that's a very good thing.  If you 
note, it also requires automatic patent licensing to all recipients of 
the software.  It's basically a patent poison pill to prevent patent 
trolling.

The big catch here is that Linden Lab needs to get permission from every 
previous contributor in order to change the license.  If even one of 
them objects, it may not be possible.

It's a murky area legally to try to "surgically remove" a previously 
accepted contribution and then change the license.  Under most 
interpretations of copyright law, once a work is a derived work, you 
can't make it not a derived work, although you may be able to start from 
an earlier version that was not a derived work.

-Gigs

On 10/07/2013 06:50 PM, Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 15:29:56 -0700, Andromeda Quonset wrote:
>
>> Henri:
>>
>> I am simply curious and don't want to cause any
>> argument or additional arguments about the
>> matter, and I support everyone's rights to privacy.
>>
>> I just looked at
>> http://www.cnil.fr/fileadmin/documents/en/Act78-17VA.pdf
>> - See chapter II, article 6, paragraph 3
>>
>> That reads as follows:
>>
>> 3° they shall be adequate, relevant and not
>> excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are
>> obtained and their further processing;
>>
>> I don't understand how that applies.
>
> The requested info (snail mail address and private phone number)
> are simply "excessive in relation for the purpose" (identifying
> an author: see below).
> Beside, that info is irrelevant to LL since it can change without
> them being notified (the author in question may move and/or change
> their phone number: mine changed 5 times in the last 10 years, due
> to lines being opened, then closed depending on my needs and moves,
> and to 2 ISP changes; I also already moved 3 times in 20 years).
> All what it results into is putting the author's RL data at risk
> of being "outed" on Internet and stalked in RL.
>
>> The other question I would ask you:  when you register any
>> original written work for a copyright in France, don't you
>> have to put in some kind of identifying information?
>
> The forename, family name and your signature are enough
> (normally complemented with your birthdate). Again, your
> address and phone number may change anytime and are perfectly
> *irrelevant*.
>
> I will also remind you how, back in 2007, LL got its customers'
> payment data stolen by pirates... The stolen file was allegedly
> crypted, but it doesn't change a fact: databases are vulnerable,
> and I'm not going to endanger my privacy on Internet, in any way.
> Call me paranoid if you wish, but my point is valid nonetheless.
>
> Henri.
> ___
> 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

[opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy

[Gigs]

http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php

You all realize this is massively incompatible with the GPL, right?


___
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] Third party viewer policy

[Gigs]

Soft Linden wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 2:21 PM, Mike Dickson  wrote:
>> On 02/23/2010 02:16 PM, Gigs wrote:
>>> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php
>>>
>>> You all realize this is massively incompatible with the GPL, right?
>>>
>> Not at all.  They're not restricting access to the code. They're
>> restricting access to their service. And defining the terms under which
>> that service is provided.
> 
> Mike's correct.
> 
> If you see any wording that's ambiguous about that, let us know.
> ___
> 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
> 

Nearly all of it?

I don't see how it would be possible to make a viewer that does not fall 
under this policy.

___
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] Third party viewer policy

[Gigs]

Robin Cornelius wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 23, 2010 at 8:31 PM, Soft Linden  wrote:
>> Mike's correct.
>>
>> If you see any wording that's ambiguous about that, let us know.
> 
> 
> Well there are many other issues another couple are :-
> 

There are many many other issues.

* It gives Linden Lab the ability to delete your private data:

"You agree to update or delete at our request any data that you have 
received from Second Life "


* It includes vague terms that are open ended:

"You must not violate or promote violation of any law or the rights of 
any individual or entity"

Any law?  Including Muslim law?  I guess depictions of homosexuality or 
women wearing normal clothes are right out.

"if you are a Developer, you are also responsible for all Third-Party 
Viewers that you develop or distribute."

Responsible in what way?  No one is going to accept liability for what 
their users do with the viewer software.  The GPL specifically allows 
developers to disclaim responsibility.  Here you give it back to them.

"Expose Second Life users, Linden Lab, or third parties to legal 
liability or harm as determined by us in our sole discretion."

How the hell are we supposed to prevent our users from exposing 
themselves to legal liability or harm?  The Internet is a big dangerous 
place.  We can't be responsible for what users do.  Period.

"we may request that you add, modify, or remove features, functionality, 
code or content, and you agree to comply with the request within a 
reasonable timeframe specified by Linden Lab."

The remedy should be solely limited to termination of access to the 
Second Life service.  Linden Lab should not be able to "assign work" to 
open source developers.

*No* developer should subject themselves to the terms of this draconian 
"policy".

We are going to need to know how we can "opt-out" of this and prevent 
our viewers from connecting to the Second Life service while remaining 
protocol compatible.  The way that it's written, you apparently wind up 
bound by it if your users connect to Second Life even if you don't want 
them to.
___
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] Third party viewer policy

[Gigs]

Lawson English wrote:
> For a real life use case, the realxtend developers are currently 
> debating whether or not it is worth their while to continue to add more 
> support to SL rather than just go with OpenSim-only.

Unless Linden Lab is willing to provide an already-banned channel ID for 
third party developers to use to prevent their software from connecting 
to Second Life, it's going to be very hard to not be subject to this 
"agreement".

Even then they user could change the channel and potentially make the 
developer liable under this agreement.
___
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 Policy makes Secondlife *content* incompatible with CC-SA licenses

[Gigs]

CC-SA says:

"You may not offer or impose any terms on the Work that restrict the 
terms of this License or the ability of the recipient of the Work to 
exercise the rights granted to that recipient under the terms of the 
License."

If anyone has uploaded CC-SA licensed textures or other materials to 
Second Life, they are now in violation of that license because of the 
new third party viewer policy section 2b which forbids reproduction of 
materials that were uploaded by someone else.

As well, any full perm materials uploaded to Second Life under a GPL 
license cannot fulfill their requirements either since there have been 
additional restrictions placed on the distribution.
___
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 Policy makes Secondlife *content* incompatible with CC-SA licenses

[Gigs]

Darmath wrote:
> If I understand your comments in this regard correctly you appear to be 
> trying to suggest that because a recipient of a work covered by the  
> CC-SA or other like license has agreed with Linden Labs that they will 
> not export a work that doesn't bare their name as a creator the person 
> who initially uploaded the content and distributed it to the received is 
> now in violation of the CC-SA.
> 
> If the above is what you're trying to suggest then I must disagree with 
> you. But I will wait to see that the above is what you're actually 
> trying to assert before i respond as to why...
> 


Person A creates content and releases it under CC-SA-By
Person B uploads this content to Second Life
Person B distributes the content to Person C

Person C now has additional terms imposed on them that restrict their 
exercise of the rights granted under CC-SA-By because of the TPV 
agreement.  Previously they could run any client with export capability 
to download the work in order to modify it.  Now they can't do that. 
Their rights to redistribute and modify under the CC-SA have been 
restricted which is a violation of the CC-SA license.
___
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 Policy makes Secondlife *content* incompatible with CC-SA licenses

[Gigs]

Mike Dickson wrote:
> Right. Person B has the responsibility to make available or point to an 
> unrestricted source for the content they upload to Second Life.  The 
> same with GPL'd content.  I don't see a reason why LL can't put 
> restrictions on content distribution within the service. It's the person 
> who imports the content that has the responsibility to insure that it 
> meets the distribution requirements under which it's licensed.

That last part is correct, it is person B's responsibility not to 
distribute the work in a way that places additional restrictions upon it.

Providing a URL to an unprotected version is not sufficient, because 
Person B has no license to distribute a restricted version within Second 
Life.  Including a URL doesn't magically grant them such a license to 
distribute a version under terms other than the CC-SA allows.

-Jason
___
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 Policy makes Secondlife *content* incompatible with CC-SA licenses

[Gigs]

Argent Stonecutter wrote:
> Gigs... I think what you're looking at is akin to Tivoization, and 
> providing an external source for Tivoized content is compatible with 
> GPL2 (and is one reason for the GPL3).
> 

CC-SA has no external source provision, and specifically forbids any 
copy protection being applied to the content.

If people are free to turn CC-SA content non-free by uploading it to a 
service that requires every user to agree not to exercise their rights 
under CC-SA, then CC-SA is fundamentally flawed.

-Jason
___
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] Detecting mouse over sky or water

[Gigs]

IIRC the touch picking code can tell you if you touched water sky or 
terrain.  I don't think it's well abstracted though and may need to be 
moved into a new class.

-Jason

Lockwood, Nick wrote:
> I’m working on a project to track what object is currently rendered at 
> the current mouse screen coordinate. There was a recent thread I found 
> (http://www.mail-archive.com/sl...@lists.secondlife.com/msg04380.html) 
> that highlights the cursorIntersect function in the LLViewerWindow 
> class. That is exactly what I’ve been using, and it seems to be working 
> just fine. The only problem is that I can’t seem to capture sky, clouds, 
> or water. The function just returns with a null value when I’m hovering 
> over any of those objects. I tried changing the depth parameter, but 
> that hasn’t helped. I also double checked the gObjectList array, and 
> there are, in fact, sky and water pcodes in there. Does anyone know of 
> any reason why I can’t retrieve those objects then?
> 
>  
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Nick
> 
>  
> 
> P.S. As a follow-up to this challenge, I am also looking to log whether 
> the mouse is hovering over a dialog box (i.e., inventory, map, chat 
> window, etc.). I tried using the cursorIntersectIcon function, but that 
> doesn’t seem to be giving me what I want. Any guidance on that would be 
> great too!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Detecting mouse over sky or water

[Gigs]

It's all jammed in LLAgent last I checked.  Like I said, probably needs 
refactoring.

Lockwood, Nick wrote:
> Thanks for the tip Jason. Which class are you referring to when you say 
> "touch picking code?"
> 
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Gigs [mailto:gigstagg...@gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 2:27 PM
> To: Lockwood, Nick
> Cc: opensource-dev@lists.secondlife.com
> Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Detecting mouse over sky or water
> 
> IIRC the touch picking code can tell you if you touched water sky or 
> terrain.  I don't think it's well abstracted though and may need to be 
> moved into a new class.
> 
> -Jason
> 
> Lockwood, Nick wrote:
>> I'm working on a project to track what object is currently rendered at 
>> the current mouse screen coordinate. There was a recent thread I found 
>> (http://www.mail-archive.com/sl...@lists.secondlife.com/msg04380.html) 
>> that highlights the cursorIntersect function in the LLViewerWindow 
>> class. That is exactly what I've been using, and it seems to be working 
>> just fine. The only problem is that I can't seem to capture sky, clouds, 
>> or water. The function just returns with a null value when I'm hovering 
>> over any of those objects. I tried changing the depth parameter, but 
>> that hasn't helped. I also double checked the gObjectList array, and 
>> there are, in fact, sky and water pcodes in there. Does anyone know of 
>> any reason why I can't retrieve those objects then?
>>
>>  
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Nick
>>
>>  
>>
>> P.S. As a follow-up to this challenge, I am also looking to log whether 
>> the mouse is hovering over a dialog box (i.e., inventory, map, chat 
>> window, etc.). I tried using the cursorIntersectIcon function, but that 
>> doesn't seem to be giving me what I want. Any guidance on that would be 
>> great too!
>>
>>
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> 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
> 

___
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] Detecting mouse over sky or water

[Gigs]

Also check LLViewerWindow::hitObjectOrLandGlobalAsync
___
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] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers

[Gigs]

Carlo Wood wrote:
> This is VERY good David.
> 
> Someone should get the lawyers AND the management of LL to read this.
> 

LL has already said the TPV policy won't be changed anymore.

The only option remaining is for everyone to stop distributing a third 
party viewer.  Except of course, the ones making things like Cryolife. 
They don't care about contracts and liability.  This policy is only 
intended to shut down legitimate developers.

___
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] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone?

[Gigs]

Second Life used to be a software patent-free zone in that the TOS 
compelled every user to grant a license under any patent rights, 
effectively making patents inside of Second Life void.

---
3.2 paragraph 3 in the old TOS:

You also understand and agree that by submitting your Content to any 
area of the Service, you automatically grant (or you warrant that the 
owner of such Content has expressly granted) to Linden Lab and to all 
other users of the Service a non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, 
transferable, irrevocable, royalty-free and perpetual License, under any 
and all patent rights you may have or obtain with respect to your 
Content, to use your Content for all purposes within the Service. You 
further agree that you will not make any claims against Linden Lab or 
against other users of the Service based on any allegations that any 
activities by either of the foregoing within the Service infringe your 
(or anyone else's) patent rights.
-


The new TOS does not include a section on compulsory patent licensing. 
I hope that this omission was unintended and will be rectified, as 
software patents are a particular danger to open source developers.

___
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] Quiet amendments of TPV (again)

[Gigs]

These look like positive changes that address some of the concerns.

Thank you for your efforts Joe.

Joe Linden wrote:
> Boy,
> 
> There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me.  
> This update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm 
> hosting today.  The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so 
> there would be no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, 
> both of which are effective on 4/30.
> 
> I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here:
> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29
> 
> -- joe
> 
___
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] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict

[Gigs]

I don't think Brett fully considered the implications of:

"You acknowledge and agree that we may require you to stop using or 
distributing a Third-Party Viewer for accessing Second Life if we 
determine that there is a violation."

Which is clearly in conflict with the GPL.

Ron Festa wrote:
> Since people wanted to see it here it is right from the Free Software 
> Foundation.
> 
> Ron Festa
> Virtual Worlds Admin
> Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
> PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
> Phone: 732-474-8583
> 
> 
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: *Brett Smith via RT* mailto:licens...@fsf.org>>
> Date: Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:00 PM
> Subject: [gnu.org  #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict
> To: ronfe...@docs.rutgers.edu 
> 
> 
>  > [ronfe...@docs.rutgers.edu  - Thu 
> Apr 15 12:02:18 2010]:
>  >
>  > Company name: Linden Research, Inc
>  > Product: Second Life Viewer
>  > Contact Info: http://lindenlab.com/contact
>  >
>  > Possible Violation: The Second Life
> Viewer is
>  > released completely under the GPLv2 with exception to the commercial
> binary
>  > blobs which have been replaced with opensource equivalents. Recently they
>  > have released a Third Party Viewer Policy (TPVP) in regards to viewers
> made
>  > from their source code that connect to their service. In this policy,
>  > section 7a appears to be in conflict with sections 11 & 12 of the 
> GPLv2 in
>  > which their source code is licensed under.
> 
> Ron,
> 
> Thanks for getting in touch with us with your concerns. It's always
> good to know that people like you take the GPL seriously enough to ask
> these sorts of questions.
> 
> My understanding is that Linden Labs' Third-Party Viewers Policy,
> despite the name, sets out policies for connecting to Second Life's own
> servers. Other services might call this kind of policy a Terms of
> Service. This statement from the policy's preamble explains their intent:
> 
> "This Policy does not place any restriction on modification or use of
> our viewer source code that we make available under the GPL. Rather, the
> Policy sets out requirements for connecting to our Second Life service
> using a Third-Party Viewer, regardless of the viewer source code used,
> and for participating in our Viewer Directory."
> 
> The freedoms granted by the GPL and other free software licenses are
> never absolute -- they are limited by law and other legal agreements.
> For example, just because the license allows you to use the software
> for any purpose does not mean you are allowed to use it to DoS a
> server, or undertake other illegal activities.
> 
> Linden Labs has the right to set policies for clients connecting to its
> servers, and that is what it has done with this policy. They do not put
> direct limits on the freedoms you have under the GPL: viewers that don't
> follow the policies could be used to connect to alternative servers as
> they become available, to make an entirely new game, or in completely
> unrelated projects. I am sympathetic to concerns that some of these
> policies may have chilling effects on development of third party viewer
> applications, but the policies are not in any inherent, direct conflict
> with the GPL's terms.
> 
> I hope this helps clear up our position on the matter for you. If you
> have other concerns, please feel free to contact us.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> --
> Brett Smith
> Licensing Compliance Engineer, Free Software Foundation
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> 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] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict

[Gigs]

Ron Festa wrote:
> Not really. If you're a user basically that means you have to stop using 
> that viewer if you want to continue access. If you are a developer it 
> means you have to remove the ability to connect to SL. Again as per the 
> FSF ruling on this, they're restricting the service not the software.

It's not a "ruling".

It's the personal opinion of a non-lawyer that works for the FSF.
___
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] Where has "Spare time" gone in 2.0 ?

[Gigs]

Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Region#Region
> 
> 2 full per core since some months
> 
> some month ago when avarage lag spreaded against script time and other
> parameter was low i ask here why this choice, so looking for around
> found this page on wiki, nobody answer (here=previous list)

You realize what you linked to say that it's one sim per core right? 
It's never been two.

___
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] the last press release...

[Gigs]

Apparently Zero has been fired as well?  I guess that means interop and 
all the standards stuff is dead.
___
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] Possibility to revert UI changes on snowstorm?

[Gigs]

On 09/20/2010 09:30 PM, Yoz Grahame wrote:
> If you're asking about reverting the entire viewer UI to 1.x: in short,
> no. In less short, we'd need an objective, well-reasoned argument
> against each and every one of the several hundred UI changes between 1.x
> and 2.x. See above.


Why would the burden be that way?   Linden Lab changed the status quo, 
they should be the ones justifying their new design, not the other way 
around.
___
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] Openjpeg/KDU the cold hard metrics

[Gigs]

On 09/22/2010 02:12 PM, Lillian Yiyuan wrote:
> Doing this out of a local cache would make it clearer what the time
> for the library is. I suspect these numbers understate the kdu
> advantage.
>

I'm pretty sure Robin's test harness is very minimal, if you are 
thinking that there's a bloated client attached to it, muddying the numbers.
___
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] 2.0 Absolute Dealbreaker - script count feature request

[Gigs]

On 09/29/2010 10:17 AM, Ambrosia wrote:
> Basically what the code does is request the inventory of every prim of
> the selected object(s). However, 'brute forcing' probably sounds a
> little wrong here, as the requests the code does already -are- indeed
> throtteled.

I can confirm this.  I've written very similar code in the past for my 
own use, and it really doesn't impact the sim very much at all.  The 
sims seem very good about not letting those kind of requests overload them.
___
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] 2.0 Absolute Dealbreaker - script count feature request

[Gigs]

On 09/29/2010 07:06 PM, Kelly Linden wrote:
> * In my mind the biggest issue is that mono scripts will appear 4x worse
> than LSL scripts. This is really the reason I am hesitant to push a
> function like this through before we have the ability for mono scripts
> to better reflect how much memory they may use. We need more development
> time for any solution on that front. Right now because a mono script
> could use 64k, that is the only number we have available to count. Maybe
> it would be nice to have an API to access number of scripts, number of
> LSL vs. Mono scripts, amount of memory used and script time used.
> However we rapidly get away from my desired philosophy of minimal
> interfaces.


Don't overcomplicate things.  Just count mono scripts as 16k as well. 
The average size of them is less than 16k, so it's still a conservative 
number.

We don't need perfection.  The person with 255 scripts in each shoe will 
still show up as using a lot.  Splitting hairs over kilobyte perfect 
accuracy is pointless.

-Jason
___
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] Jira Issue Resolution Issue

[Gigs]

On 10/11/2010 12:44 PM, Robert Martin wrote:
> 3 "WorkingOnIt Linden"* should only have an issue assigned for maybe
> two weeks since a lot of times WorkingOnIt Linden means BlowingItOff
> Linden is actually NOT working on it.


Workingonit Linden should have never been created.  "Working on it" 
should be represented as a workflow status, not as a fake account.

-Jason
___
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