Re: [opensource-dev] Third party viewer policy: commencement date

[Michael Dickson]

Thats the real issue IMO.  Much of the confusion seems to me to be due
to a separate document that describes "new" requirements.  If this is
simply designed to protect and define access to the servers then it
should have simply been an addition to the TOS, which defines  the
conditions under which a connection to secondlife is permitted.

Mike

On Sun, 2010-03-21 at 08:41 +, Gareth Nelson wrote:
> Or anyone who has an issue with it can close their account and
> blatantly violate this policy.
> 
> This raises a question: has the TOS been updated to contain words to
> the effect of "you agree to be bound by the TPV"? If not, any
> developers may simply reject the policy
> 
> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:45 AM, Carlo Wood  wrote:
> > On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 09:21:25AM -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
> >> The updated version of the Third Party Viewer Policy was posted here about 
> >> a
> >> week ago:
> >> http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php
> >
> > That says that if a developer changes the code and distributes it,
> > you reserve the right to pursue any and all legal and equitable remedies:
> >
> > 3 a. If you are a [...] Developer of Third-Party Viewers, you must not:
> >  [...] design Third-Party Viewers to [...]
> >
> > If we believe you are or have been associated with activities that violate
> > this paragraph, either within or outside of Second Life, we may take any
> > enforcement action we deem appropriate [...] and pursuit of all legal and
> > equitable remedies.
> >
> > 7 d. You (Developer of Third-Party Viewers) assume all risks, expenses, and
> > defects of any Third-Party Viewers that you [use,] develop, or(!) 
> > distribute.
> >
> > This is not compatible with the GPL.
> > Therefore, anyone who contributed to the GPL-ed code has a case
> > if they want to retract their contribution.
> >
> > --
> > 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
> >
> 
> 
> 


___
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] [solved?] Re: SLPlugin lagging my viewer like crazy, maybe it was a bad idea from the start?

[Michael Dickson]

On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 22:58 +, Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:39:00 +0100
> Lance Corrimal  wrote:
> 
> > Anyways, shouldn't SLPlugin exit when it is done doing what it
> > thought it should be doing?
> 
> installed and configured Pulseaudio
> now only ONE SLPlugin thread executed, with very low processor
> usage.
Can you provide a bit more details on what you mean by installed and
configured?  I'm running the same config (pulseaudio through openal) and
I definitely get extra SLPlugin processes.

Mike

> 
> ___
> 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] [solved?] Re: SLPlugin lagging my viewer like crazy, maybe it was a bad idea from the start?

[Michael Dickson]

Thanks!  I just upgraded to the 10.4 beta, I'll give it a try. I was
having problems on a similar setup with x64 Fedora but that issue may
have been related to the 64bit distro.

Mike

On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 23:26 +, Opensource Obscure wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:11:03 -0500, Michael Dickson 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 2010-03-24 at 22:58 +, Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> >> On Mon, 8 Mar 2010 09:39:00 +0100
> >> Lance Corrimal  wrote:
> >> 
> >> > Anyways, shouldn't SLPlugin exit when it is done doing what it
> >> > thought it should be doing?
> >> 
> >> installed and configured Pulseaudio
> >> now only ONE SLPlugin thread executed, with very low processor
> >> usage.
> > Can you provide a bit more details on what you mean by installed and
> > configured?  I'm running the same config (pulseaudio through openal) and
> > I definitely get extra SLPlugin processes.
> 
> if this can help, SLPugin works fine here with the default
> ubuntu 10.04 alpha setup, and I think it worked fine 
> on ubuntu 9.10 as well
> 
> libopenal1 version is 1.11.753-0ubuntu1
> pulseaudio is 0.9.22~0.9.21
> 
> bye
> opensource obscure


___
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] [Linux] Frequent crashes with last Viewer 2 beta release

[Michael Dickson]

I was seeing frequent crashes with Emerald and 10.04 w/Nvidia. I traced
it to an issue with the nVidia driver not correctly managing the fan and
the GPU overheating. It's been reported as an issue with the recommended
drivers in 10.04. I downgraded to the older nVidia driver and the
problem cleared up.

Mike

On Sun, 2010-03-28 at 18:42 +, Opensource Obscure wrote:
> Viewer 2 Beta is crashing much often since its last release,
> even with Run Multiple Threads and Deferred Rendering options
> disabled. These are mostly crashes, with the application
> closing immediately; freezes are rarer than crashes, but 
> still happening more often than in previous releases.
> 
> As a feeling .. this is related to rendering, as most crashes
> appear while I'm moving the view around.
> 
> I'm on Linux Ubuntu 10.04 alpha with Nvidia video card.
> Anyone else is experiencing this?
> I didn't reported it yet.
> 
> opensource obscure
> ___
> 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] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions

[Michael Dickson]

You just enjoy making friends all over the map don't you?

Mike

On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 02:34 +, Carlo Wood wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 11:06:59PM +0800, Boy Lane wrote:
> > What are you still doing here?
> 
> I would move to opensim immediately, but:
> 
> 1) It crashes non-stop
> 2) It can TOTALLY not deal with packetloss:
>2a) Avatar textures are extremely often corrupt.
>2b) Attachment won't attach/detach
>2c) I suffer from "rubber banding"
>2d) If I import stuff it literally ends up all over the sim.
> 3) Many other bugs have been there for years now
>and seem not to be fixed or addressed. For example,
>3a) Try sitting on a prim
>3b) Try standing on a slope
>3c) Try writing a script
>and so on.
> 
> There simply is no alternative :(
> 
> The opensim servers are very VERY buggy and bad quality,
> so much so that I seriously doubt the competence of it's
> developers to every deliver anything usable.
> 
> What we need is to start over, write a new server from
> the ground up (in C++ if I'm to participate).
> 


___
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] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available

[Michael Dickson]

Actually his intention could be to contribute the patches *to* snowglobe
in which case it's not a new TPV and a very reasonable example of
cooperation with a company sponsored open source project.

That's actually very likely his intention since the patches *ARE*
SNOW-375 and not MY_TPV-375 or somesuch.

Mike

On Mon, 2010-04-05 at 17:41 +, Morgaine wrote:
> Nope, client-side scripting and an HTTP/REST server are not in
> Snowglobe.  Your patch SNOW-375 when applied to Snowglobe sources
> created a derived work from Snowglobe.  The derived viewer is clearly
> a TPV.
> 
> This is why I am asking you what this new TPV is called, since it is
> not Snowglobe but only based on it.
> 
> 
> Morgaine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ===
> 
> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 1:42 PM, Dzonatas Sol 
> wrote:
> Has client-side scripting and an HTTP/REST server been offered
> in Snowglobe before patch SNOW-375? I'm not sure how you are
> able to determine such features as "derived" from Snowglobe.
> 
> 
> The SNOW-375 patch
> Morgaine wrote:
> That sounds pretty interesting, Dzonatas.
> 
> What is your viewer called, this TPV derived from
> Snowglobe with an extra patch?
> 
> 
> Morgaine.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> =
> 
> 
> On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 6:43 PM, Dzonatas Sol
> mailto:dzona...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> 
>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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


___
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] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Michael Dickson]

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 16:27 +, Joe Linden wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> 
> -- Joe

Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not
attend?

Thanks!

Mike



___
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 blacklist to replace the TPV directory ?

[Michael Dickson]

On Thu, 2010-04-29 at 09:10 +, Opensource Obscure wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Apr 2010 10:56:58 +0200, Henri Beauchamp  wrote:
> 
> > Instead of a white list for which Linden Lab actually guarantees
> > nothing and to which some developers won't be able to register anyway
> > because of privacy and local Law concerns, why not making a black
> > list ?
> > 
> > The black list would contain the viewer names of right out illegal
> > viewers or not yet TPV-policy compliant viewers
> 
> this doesn't looks like a practical solution to me, as nobody 
> could ever mantain such a list up-to-date.

Right, I agree.  And for that reason its actually a negative since it
would give a possibly false assurance that a viewer not being listed is
"ok".  IMO the directory is doing what its meant to do, give an
assurance that LL and the viewer creator has done some diligence and are
interested in keeping its use safe and consistent with the TOS.  Not
being in the list doesn't give any assurance like that hence the
potential for concern.  The easy answer is to get a listing in the
directory.  If that causes some folks heartburn then you're just going
to have to live on the edge and deal with some concerned users.

Mike

> opensource obscure
> ___
> 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