From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Thu Apr 1 01:42:24 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 09:42:24 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? Message-ID: On 21st March, Q Linden explained to usthat legalese is not a language amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll repeat his words here for clarity: * Kent Quirk (Q Linden)* q at lindenlab.com *Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010* - I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: - Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a mailing list. - Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand up in court if they need it to. - Q I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law works in this area? The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no other way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) That leaves only the matter of *users* of TPVs behaving responsibly when they use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is happy to agree. (Note that developers become *users* when they connect to SL, and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do something bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they are personally responsible for their actions. In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. Morgaine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/56073eae/attachment-0001.htm From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 01:54:03 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 01:54:03 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1270112043.3028.31.camel@RAGE> How many times must it be said? The problem isn't that there's people interpreting it. The problem is that there's NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. Section 7a: > If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers that you develop or distribute. I honestly am not going to believe a Linden who's handwaving what is an OBVIOUS and CLEAR statement simply because we're not lawyers. I mean, honestly. What is a lawyer going to say? "Oh, by that, they actually mean you are NOT responsible"? I HIGHLY doubt that. On Thu, 2010-04-01 at 09:42 +0100, Morgaine wrote: > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a > language amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more > specifically, that programmers like ourselves should not expect to > understand this Linden TPV policy document using our normal logic and > our normal dictionary. I'll repeat his words here for clarity: > > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > * I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal > team. But: > * Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, > and it's not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. > Think of lawyers as people who write code in an underspecified > language for a buggy compiler, and you begin to understand why > legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that isn't > stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing > settled law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, > you probably shouldn't be attempting to interpret legal > documents -- especially not for other people. Similarly, if > you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret program > source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a > normal dictionary because they're logical thinkers. That > doesn't always work. If you have legal questions about the > implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a > mailing list. > * Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this > forum or any other could possibly be treated as legally > binding. That also goes for Linden employees, especially those > with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get further remarks > or "clarifications", except general statements that don't > address specific questions. The policy was revised based on > comments on this list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty > good indication that Linden Lab's lawyers now think it's clear > enough to state its intent and to stand up in court if they > need it to. > * Q > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship > to our ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational > person could agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it > even legal to be required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does > anyone know how the law works in this area? > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be > understood by programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority > of people here understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are > issuing a valid GPL license, perhaps one might accept that at face > value, and assume that GPLv2 clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and > valid. Therefore there are no "further restrictions" imposed on SL > TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO WARRANTY" clause (11-12) > continues to protect developers from downstream liability, and no > "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the conditions of this > License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then > no longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and > freedoms and lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. > (It could be no other way anyway, since we are told that we cannot > understand the TPV.) > > That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when > they use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this > list is happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they > connect to SL, and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When > users do something bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden > client, then naturally they are personally responsible for their > actions. > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this > is the best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to > incomprehensible conditions is not something that any sensible person > should consider. > > > Morgaine. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 1 01:54:48 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:54:48 +0000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: An interesting point: If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can actually consent to agree to it. Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine wrote: > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language > amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that > programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV > policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary.? I'll > repeat his words here for clarity: > > > ??? Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > ??? Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not > always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people > who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you > begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that > isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled > law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't > be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other > people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary > because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have > legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, > not a mailing list. > > Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other > could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden > employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get > further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't > address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this > list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden > Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand > up in court if they need it to. > > Q > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our > ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could > agree to something unknown, except under duress.? Is it even legal to be > required to agree to the incomprehensible?? Does anyone know how the law > works in this area? > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by > programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here > understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL > license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 > clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid.? Therefore there are no > "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO > WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream > liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the > conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no > longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and > lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL.? (It could be no other > way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) > > That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they > use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is > happy to agree.? (Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, > and are bound by the same requirements as users.)? When users do something > bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they > are personally responsible for their actions. > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the > best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible > conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. > > > Morgaine. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From lenglish5 at cox.net Thu Apr 1 02:29:44 2010 From: lenglish5 at cox.net (Lawson English) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 02:29:44 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] new TOS - TPV "legally" binding. :/ In-Reply-To: References: <201003311852.44881.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BB37F43.9050606@cox.net> Message-ID: <4BB46788.90709@cox.net> Gareth Nelson wrote: > You're always welcome to not accept the TOS........ and thus lose all > your inworld assets > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Lawson English wrote: > >> Lance Corrimal wrote: >> >>> just had a little popup shoving the new TOS under my nose, and behold, >>> with accepting the TOS you also accept the TPV. >>> _______________________________________________ >>> >>> >> I wonder if that's even legal... >> >> >> Well, my point is that a click-through agreement with side-effects that no-one understands doesn't sound like a particularly binding agreement or even an agreement at all. I mean, LL could put in: "when you agree to this you are agreeing to the provision that your First Born will be sacrificed to FSM at our convenience," if they wanted to, or any other reference to any other future situation that has no relevance to the main intent of the EULA... This doesn't sound sufficiently focused to stand up in a court of law. Lawson From sempuki1 at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 03:04:41 2010 From: sempuki1 at gmail.com (Ryan McDougall) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 13:04:41 +0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] new TOS - TPV "legally" binding. :/ In-Reply-To: <4BB46788.90709@cox.net> References: <201003311852.44881.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BB37F43.9050606@cox.net> <4BB46788.90709@cox.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:29 PM, Lawson English wrote: > Gareth Nelson wrote: >> You're always welcome to not accept the TOS........ and thus lose all >> your inworld assets >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Lawson English wrote: >> >>> Lance Corrimal wrote: >>> >>>> just had a little popup shoving the new TOS under my nose, and behold, >>>> with accepting the TOS you also accept the TPV. >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> >>>> >>> I wonder if that's even legal... >>> >>> >>> > Well, my point is that a click-through agreement with side-effects that > no-one understands doesn't sound like a particularly binding agreement > or even an agreement at all. > > I mean, LL could put in: "when you agree to this you are agreeing to the > provision that your First Born will be sacrificed to FSM at our > convenience," if they wanted to, or any other reference to any other > future situation that has no relevance to the main intent of the EULA... > > > This doesn't sound sufficiently focused to stand up in a court of law. > > > Lawson Right, we could argue about LL's "good will" or whether which clauses would stand up in court -- the point is do *you* want to be the one to put your life on hold to test your legal theories out? Even if you're right you're screwed! This is the clearest signal yet that there is no SL "ecosystem" nor will there ever be, and anyone not directly contributing to LL's business model should develop for OpenSim. Cheers, From darmath at tpg.com.au Thu Apr 1 03:41:58 2010 From: darmath at tpg.com.au (Darmath) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:41:58 +1100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB47876.5060008@tpg.com.au> On 1/04/2010 7:42 PM, Morgaine wrote: > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us > > that legalese is not a language amenable to "common sense" > interpretation, and more specifically, that programmers like ourselves > should not expect to understand this Linden TPV policy document using > our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll repeat his words > here for clarity: > You can quote Q's words all you like Morgaine but don't twist their meaning so that you can continually flog your erroneous dead horse. That said let's actually look at what he said shall we? * Kent Quirk (Q Linden)* q at lindenlab.com > /Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010/ > > * I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal > team. But: > > * Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, > and it's not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. > Think of lawyers as people who write code in an underspecified > language for a buggy compiler, and you begin to understand why > legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that isn't > stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing > settled law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you > probably shouldn't be attempting to interpret legal documents -- > especially not for other people. > It is quite simple what Q meant. What he simply meant, and quite rightly was justified in pointing out, was that you can't take a written legal document and an ordinary dictionary and ascertain the meaning and more importantly the legal effect of a legal document using a dictionary alone. Especially if you think you're going to anticipate what a court may or may not do on the basis of that document. Q was seeking to stress that law like every other subject area, known to mankind, has its own particular language in which people, judges, lawyers and the legislators, communicate. Computer scientists are no exception. Nor are lawyers. Words that are used by lawyers, judges and legislators may or may not have acquired a technial meaning within legal contexts, within a jurisdiction, and where it has acquired such a meaning it may in a particular context be given that meaning. Hell even within the law there are words that in one legal context may mean one thing and in another legal context mean another thing altogether. Q, so far as United States of America, England, perhaps more widely to be stated as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and countless other jurisdictions have "unwritten" or "unstated" law as you damn well know. That courts in deciding disputes in these jurisdictions, depending upon your view, "find" or "propound" legal principle to resolve the dispute. It's also fundamentally flawed to think that lawyers and judges do not employ logical reasoning in the process of resolving disputes. They use not only inductive reasoning skills but deductive reasoning skills both of which are forms of logical reasoning. Inductive reasoning skills are used in common law jurisdictions to ascertain the legal principles that are contained in the judgements of judges which constitute the law. Deductive reasoning skills are used in the application of legal principles to the factual resolution of cases. But, and this is where Q was damn right to say what he said, the only way in which you can actually determine the legal effect of the document is with a comprehensive understanding of legal principles, including those to be found in legislation, and especially in common law jurisdictions, those found by the courts. Attempts to try and ascertain the legal effect of legal documents without that knowledge are fraught with danger and they lead to huge misunderstandings and miscomprehension. > * Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are > especially susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents > using a normal dictionary because they're logical thinkers. That > doesn't always work. If you have legal questions about the > implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, not a mailing > list. > The above view is something I agree with with one exception. The exception relates to the notion of programmers being "logical thinkers" and the apparent suggestion that lawyers aren't. I haven't heard anything so absurd in my life really. There is a difference between something being logical and something according to what we actually like. I challenge anyone to read a written legal judgement of a superior court in any jurisdiction to find an opinion where the judges, when they actually wrote their own decision on the matter, weren't at pains to use logical reasoning to support the decision which they rendered. That the outcome of a case doesn't accord with our personal preferences doesn't mean that the decision was "illogical" and not formed on logical reasoning. Further to the above I dont think there would be much disagreement from those that read this list that being able to read and write program code "properly" requires a certain degree of appropriate technical qualification and experience. It's what distinguishes the seasoned professional from the "amateur" or new entrant into any field. Lawyers and judges and people in the law in general aren't different. Hence the emphasis on consulting a lawyer. But one would probably add that you should consult a lawyer with experience in the relevant area of law. > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship > to our ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational > person could agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it > even legal to be required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does > anyone know how the law works in this area? > The key assumption here is your assumption that the document is incomprehensible. But incomprehensible to whom? You? Everyone in the entire world? Everyone reading this mailing list? If you're talking about yourself then please do so and quite simply state "i don't understand the document and have no idea of its legal effect". If that is the case then quite simply don't bind yourself to the relevant agreement which subjects you to the terms of the TPVP. Sure I could probably give you some legal information about how the law in this area works based upon my understanding of English law and Australian law in this area. Given the historical links of the US to England then the law might well be the same. It might not. The question is are you really interested? So far i've reached the view that you're not looking for a legal analysis that is contrary to the view that you have. You're looking for the legal analysis that supports your view. In the context of contract, at least so far as England, and Australia are concerned, and possibly the United States given its links back to the English, the law took the view, as far as my legal knowledge is concerned, that a person that had agreed to something, would be held to their agreement, unless they were subject to a particular "disability" that vitiated their agreement, or as a result of the circumstances their agreement was to be regarded as "non-genuine". This was the case whether or not the person agreeing readily appreciated what they were agreeing to or not. And this was evidenced in the rule that one was bound to a written agreement that they had signed even if they were unawares of what the document said, or comprehended it. There were circumstances in which one could claim that the circumstances were such that it should be regarded as if they hadn't signed it at all. I wont venture into them. Obviously the act of signature was used as the act to obtain the individual's agreement to that which was contained in the document. Whether or not a court would distinguish clicking an "accept" or "ok" button to a signature is an issue that I don't think courts have, from a common law point of view in this jurisdiction, fully resolved here. To soften that approach the law, mostly through the courts, developed principles and doctrines which softened the principle. For example if a person was subjected to the use of illegitimate pressure as a means of securing their agreement then the consent of the person to the agreement would not be regarded as being genuine and the person would not be bound by their agreement (The doctrine of duress). A further illustration would be the doctrine of unconscionable conduct that has been developed at least in this jurisdiction so that a person couldn't as a result of their dominant position in relation to another, use that position, to take advantage of the weaker position occupied by the party with whom the stronger party may be contracting. That might include taking advantage of the lack of english skills a person has in understanding a legal document, when known by the stronger party, and exploited by the stronger party to obtain the weaker party's consent/agreement. I'm not sure if the same can be said of US law but here the relevant precedent would be Commercial Bank of Australia v Amadio a decision of the Australian High Court. US law might be similar in this respect it might not, i would anticipate that US law would be roughly the same with respect to the binding nature of one's agreement where they didnt fully comprehend the terms they were agreeing to it. On a final note you wrote: " The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here understand it" Yes and that's probably why as far as legal documents go I wouldn't give it a great rating if I was assigning one to it. Using a rating system of 5 starts i'd probably give it 3.5 stars. Is it effective to do what it sets out to do? Yes. Does that mean it's "good" or "great"? I ask the question because it seems the GPL is being held out as if its some sort of majestical perfect legal document and the reality is it isn't. Indeed one might point to its quality for fostering the erroneous belief, in my opinion, that the licence which it confers is irrevocable. There may be a legal basis for arguing that the licence it confers is not revocable but, in my view, if it is found that one cannot revoke the licence conferred under the GPL it wont be on the basis of that document alone. Instead it will be on the back of other legal principles the existence of which lawyers are well aware of. Now I hope everyone has a happy easter. Darmath -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/a403583c/attachment-0001.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Thu Apr 1 04:04:13 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 13:04:13 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> References: <201003301429.39986.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <5c63fe8c1003300536u54ff32b8ld5cb0ed2bb1b8c8d@mail.gmail.com> <4BB2196A.6060807@tamzap.com> <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:52PM +0000, Gareth Nelson wrote: > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. That would be EXTREMELY against the spirit of open source and the use of GPL. It would also make it impossible for any TPV to use their code anymore: TPV's added patches that are pure-GPL. LL does not have copyright on those patches, so those remain GPL. Therefore it is not possible to link code resulting from those patches with code that is GPL+TPVP, which would be non-GPL because it has extra restrictions. Thus, if this is true (or if they'd do that in the future) then it is EXTERMELY important to understand; because it DOES mean that all TPV's have to stop using any additional code released by LL after 30 April 2010. -- Carlo Wood From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 04:13:36 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 06:13:36 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Keep in mind, most of this "legalese" that they have is just to cover their own asses. Many MANY companies do stuff like this just in case that if something ever escalates to a point where those words come to play in court, they have all their P's and Q's. Linden Labs is a company, folks...a company that has a budget, a bottom-line, and most of all liable assets in which they need to protect in order to keep themselves afloat and give us all something to rant about ( I'm just kidding :P ). An age-old question comes to mind... "How many programmers does it take to change a lightbulb?" Answer One, Zero, we don't have the source code for it. Answer Two, Zero, it's a hardware issue. Jonathan Irvin On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 03:54, Gareth Nelson wrote: > An interesting point: > If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can > comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can > actually consent to agree to it. > > Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine > wrote: > > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language > > amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that > > programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden > TPV > > policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll > > repeat his words here for clarity: > > > > > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > > Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > > > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > > > Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's > not > > always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as > people > > who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and > you > > begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law > that > > isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing > settled > > law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably > shouldn't > > be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other > > people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal > dictionary > > because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have > > legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a > lawyer, > > not a mailing list. > > > > Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any > other > > could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden > > employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get > > further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't > > address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on > this > > list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden > > Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to > stand > > up in court if they need it to. > > > > Q > > > > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to > our > > ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person > could > > agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be > > required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law > > works in this area? > > > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood > by > > programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here > > understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL > > license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that > GPLv2 > > clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no > > "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the > "NO > > WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream > > liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the > > conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no > > longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms > and > > lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no > other > > way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) > > > > That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when > they > > use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is > > happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they connect to > SL, > > and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do > something > > bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally > they > > are personally responsible for their actions. > > > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is > the > > best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible > > conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. > > > > > > Morgaine. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/c266a864/attachment.htm From simon.disk29 at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 05:48:14 2010 From: simon.disk29 at gmail.com (Simon Disk) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 08:48:14 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB39ED7.401@gmail.com> Message-ID: Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under Intelectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license under IPR (and therefore also patent rights). Under section 4.1 it defines IPR as: "Intellectual Property Rights" means copyrights, trademarks, service marks, trade dress, publicity rights, database rights, *patent rights*, and other intellectual property rights or proprietary rights recognized by law. Then under section 7.1: You retain any and all *Intellectual Property Rights* you already hold under applicable law in Content you upload, publish, and submit to or through the Servers, Websites, and other areas of the Service, subject to the rights, licenses, and other terms of this Agreement, including any underlying rights of other users or Linden Lab in Content that you may use or modify. Then under 7.2: You agree that by uploading, publishing, or submitting any Content to or through the Servers, Websites, or other areas of the Service, you hereby automatically grant Linden Lab a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sublicenseable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the Service. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/4bc8f325/attachment.htm From danielravennest at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 05:59:33 2010 From: danielravennest at gmail.com (Daniel) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 07:59:33 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Subject: Re: Can you legally agree to, incomprehensible conditions? Message-ID: <4BB498B5.4030204@gmail.com> From: Darmath That might include taking advantage of the lack of english skills a person has in understanding a legal document, when known by the stronger party, and exploited by the stronger party to obtain the weaker party's consent/agreement. --------- A question for anyone who uses the SL viewer with a different default language, or the LL staff who might know: Is the new Terms of Service presented at login being shown in every language the internationalization supports? If yes, then does the meaning of the document remain unchanged through the vagaries of translation? If no, how can people agree to something they cannot even read, for the set of users who are not bilingual in their own language and English? Daniel From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Thu Apr 1 06:48:16 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 15:48:16 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Subject: Re: Can you legally agree to, incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: <4BB498B5.4030204@gmail.com> References: <4BB498B5.4030204@gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004011548.16742.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> > A question for anyone who uses the SL viewer with a different default > language, or the LL staff who might know: Is the new Terms of Service > presented at login being shown in every language the internationalization > supports? If yes, then does the meaning of the document remain unchanged > through the vagaries of translation? If no, how can people agree to > something they cannot even read, for the set of users who are not > bilingual in their own language and English? It's not translated. non-english users agree blindly to something they might not be able to read at all... ...hardly binding / legal in my eyes. bye, LC From blakar at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 07:02:35 2010 From: blakar at gmail.com (Dirk Moerenhout) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 16:02:35 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: <1270112043.3028.31.camel@RAGE> References: <1270112043.3028.31.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: Maybe you should ponder awhile about what "responsible" actually implies within this context. You seem to think you're not responsible for code you develop or distribute thanks to the GPL. Let us travel back a bit in time to when the US thought that they should control cryptography related software. Do you really believe that US citizens would've been guaranteed safety from prosecution if they openly exported GPL'd cryptographic software? The GPL clearly includes "TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW" if you wonder in how far Sections 11 and 12 can help you out. That part of the GPL basically should help you understand that distributing software is a risk unless you know _ALL_ applicable law. For US citizens for example patent law comes to mind as being quite a burden. I still need to see somebody who can give a sensible example of where their legal rights diminish upto a point where frivolous law suits are suddenly possible thanks to the TPVP. Dirk On 1 April 2010 10:54, Rob Nelson wrote: > How many times must it be said? > > The problem isn't that there's people interpreting it. ?The problem is > that there's NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. > > Section 7a: > >> If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all features, > functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers that you develop > or distribute. > > I honestly am not going to believe a Linden who's handwaving what is an > OBVIOUS and CLEAR statement simply because we're not lawyers. ?I mean, > honestly. ?What is a lawyer going to say? ?"Oh, by that, they actually > mean you are NOT responsible"? ?I HIGHLY doubt that. > > From jessesa at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 07:12:52 2010 From: jessesa at gmail.com (Jesse Barnett) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:12:52 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Subject: Re: Can you legally agree to, incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: <201004011548.16742.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <4BB498B5.4030204@gmail.com> <201004011548.16742.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: Actually reports in the forum stated that many had to agree to a completely blank box with no text inside. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > > > > A question for anyone who uses the SL viewer with a different default > > language, or the LL staff who might know: Is the new Terms of Service > > presented at login being shown in every language the internationalization > > supports? If yes, then does the meaning of the document remain unchanged > > through the vagaries of translation? If no, how can people agree to > > something they cannot even read, for the set of users who are not > > bilingual in their own language and English? > > It's not translated. > non-english users agree blindly to something they might not be able to read > at > all... > ...hardly binding / legal in my eyes. > > > bye, > LC > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/c2759fe9/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Thu Apr 1 08:06:59 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 23:06:59 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions References: Message-ID: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> Clearly NO. Honestly, I don't know why this matters anymore. Everything was said. Linden made it clear they'll stick to their TPV "guns". Four viewer projects announced they discontinue support for SL, that is Imprudence, RealXtend, Luna and Rainbow. Some other people still hang on but probably not for long. That's leaving only two graphical 3rd party viewer projects around, both with a shady gray past in terms of intentional producing malicious clients or violating software licenses. I see a great future ahead... And now Viewer 2.0 is the new holy grail. I really thought the 1.23 release was bad. But now 2.0 even goes against a major part of the resident population, handicapped people; particular people with epilepsy/seizure disorders (VWR-17249 - Viewer 2.0 is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act). http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-17249 What are you still doing here? Boy > Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 09:42:24 +0100 > From: Morgaine > Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible > conditions? > To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to > usthat > legalese is not a language amenable to "common sense" interpretation, > and more specifically, that programmers like ourselves should not expect > to > understand this Linden TPV policy document using our normal logic and our > normal dictionary. I'll repeat his words here for clarity: > > > * Kent Quirk (Q Linden)* q at lindenlab.com > > *Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010* > > > - I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. > But: > > > - Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and > it's > not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers > as > people who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy > compiler, > and you begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot > of > law that isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the > existing settled law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, > you > probably shouldn't be attempting to interpret legal documents -- > especially > not for other people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting > to > interpret program source code is a risky business. Programmers are > especially susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a > normal > dictionary because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. > If > you have legal questions about the implication of documents, you should > ask > a lawyer, not a mailing list. > > > - Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any > other could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for > Linden employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're > unlikely to > get further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that > don't address specific questions. The policy was revised based on > comments > on this list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication > that > Linden Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and > to > stand up in court if they need it to. > > > - Q > > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to > our > ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person > could > agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be > required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law > works in this area? > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood > by > programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here > understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL > license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that > GPLv2 > clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no > "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the > "NO > WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream > liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the > conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no > longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and > lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no > other > way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) > > That leaves only the matter of *users* of TPVs behaving responsibly when > they use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list > is > happy to agree. (Note that developers become *users* when they connect to > SL, and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do > something bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then > naturally they are personally responsible for their actions. > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is > the > best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible > conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. > > > Morgaine. > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/56073eae/attachment.htm From bishopj at bishopphillips.com Thu Apr 1 08:58:16 2010 From: bishopj at bishopphillips.com (Jonathan Bishop) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 02:58:16 +1100 Subject: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB39ED7.401@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4C76A5279AC348FBBDF71639E7A90ABA@neptune.priv> > Simon Disk: > Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under Intellectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license under IPR (and therefore also patent rights). Yes. I agree. That seems to be the case. S4.1, S7.1, and S7.2, however don't seem to do what the previous patent peace clause did however. This one entitles LL to deal with the IP, but it does not extinguish the right for an creator to assert patent rights over content with respect to the created content of other creators, so it does not seem to go as far in ensuring patent peace as the previous TOS. In fact by grouping patents with copyright and trademarks under IP it looks to me like it might have the opposite effect - to actively endorse the establishment and assertion of such rights with respect to patents. I wonder if this was intended. There are strong arguments on both sides of the view, but given Ginsu Linden's (Linden Lawyer) previous strong pronouncements against patents in software generally and specifically in the context of user generated content in SL, a TOS that appears to omit the more encompassing patent peace clause is surprising. No doubt there is a reason for it, but I can't see the intrusion of patent protection into SL content as beneficial for innovation and advancement of the VW concept at this early stage in the game. Regards Jonathan Bishop Managing Director Bishop Phillips Consulting | Melbourne, Australia - Vancouver, Canada Mobile +61 411.404.483 | Office +61 (3) 9525.7066 | Fax +61 (3) 9525.6080 bishopj at bishopphillips.com | www.bishopphillips.com _____ From: opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com [mailto:opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Simon Disk Sent: Thursday, 1 April 2010 11:48 PM To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under Intelectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license under IPR (and therefore also patent rights). Under section 4.1 it defines IPR as: "Intellectual Property Rights" means copyrights, trademarks, service marks, trade dress, publicity rights, database rights, patent rights, and other intellectual property rights or proprietary rights recognized by law. Then under section 7.1: You retain any and all Intellectual Property Rights you already hold under applicable law in Content you upload, publish, and submit to or through the Servers, Websites, and other areas of the Service, subject to the rights, licenses, and other terms of this Agreement, including any underlying rights of other users or Linden Lab in Content that you may use or modify. Then under 7.2: You agree that by uploading, publishing, or submitting any Content to or through the Servers, Websites, or other areas of the Service, you hereby automatically grant Linden Lab a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, sublicenseable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the Service. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/a1df9f30/attachment-0001.htm -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: image/gif Size: 2614 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/a1df9f30/attachment-0001.gif From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 09:09:16 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:09:16 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> References: <201003301429.39986.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BB2196A.6060807@tamzap.com> <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Linden Labs could care less about what you put in your viewer. They are concerned about their product, which is Second Life. If YOUR viewer connects to THEIR network, heck yeah you can be liable for it...maybe not in the traditional sense, but you can agree you hold some responsibility for your actions. All that "legalese" is to prevent us, the developers, from shrugging our shoulders and saying "Oops, my bad." LL is covering their backs. Regardless of how you phrase it, code it, compile it...without the Second Life service. Your viewer is a brick. I don't know anyone's tenure here in SL, and I won't ask. But, I remember "real" grid crashes. I remember before there was the grey goo fence and people taking down the grid with the OFFICIAL SecondLife viewer. With Third-Party viewers coming into play and Linden Labs releasing more and more bits of their service to the users, there has to be regulation and restrictions in order to protect the business. There is infinitely more chance for something to go wrong when you throw third-party viewers in the mix. Jonathan Irvin On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 06:04, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:52PM +0000, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra > > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. > > That would be EXTREMELY against the spirit of open source and the use > of GPL. It would also make it impossible for any TPV to use their code > anymore: TPV's added patches that are pure-GPL. LL does not have copyright > on those patches, so those remain GPL. Therefore it is not possible > to link code resulting from those patches with code that is GPL+TPVP, > which would be non-GPL because it has extra restrictions. > > Thus, if this is true (or if they'd do that in the future) then it is > EXTERMELY important to understand; because it DOES mean that all TPV's > have to stop using any additional code released by LL after 30 April 2010. > > -- > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/56985564/attachment.htm From lear.cale at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 09:31:37 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:31:37 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB39ED7.401@gmail.com> Message-ID: This was never prohibited by the old patent clause, which applied only to the patent holder's content. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Jonathan Bishop wrote: >> 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. > > > Actually, it is more serious than the open source developers...and way more > problematic than the complex and subtle interplay of the TOS and the TPVP. > Without the "patent peace" clause it is possible for people to apply to > patent content in SL. ?Which means scripts and combinations of objects and > methods. > > > This is potentially disastrous for SL creators and LL as their world could > be wrapped up in patents that prevent the creation of new content. ?We could > look forward to patents on "a method to simulate wearable realworld skirts > using attached textured prims" - the prim skirt, and "a method to conduct > meetings in virtual worlds among remote attendees" - the meeting room. > > And, of course none of the content would be of sufficient value to justify > filing a defense over. > > Regards > > Jonathan Bishop > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From lear.cale at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 09:33:17 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:33:17 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? In-Reply-To: <4C76A5279AC348FBBDF71639E7A90ABA@neptune.priv> References: <4BB39ED7.401@gmail.com> <4C76A5279AC348FBBDF71639E7A90ABA@neptune.priv> Message-ID: The previous patent clause did not do what you claim it did. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Jonathan Bishop wrote: > > Simon Disk: > > > Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under > Intellectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license > under IPR (and therefore also patent rights)? > > > > Yes. I agree. That seems to be the case. S4.1, S7.1, and S7.2, however > don?t seem to do what the previous patent peace clause did however. This > one entitles LL to deal with the IP, but it does not extinguish the right > for an creator to assert patent rights over content with respect to the > created content of other creators, so it does not seem to go as far in > ensuring patent peace as the previous TOS. In fact by grouping patents with > copyright and trademarks under IP it looks to me like it might have the > opposite effect ? to actively endorse the establishment and assertion of > such rights with respect to patents. > > > > I wonder if this was intended. There are strong arguments on both sides of > the view, but given Ginsu Linden?s (Linden Lawyer) previous strong > pronouncements against patents in software generally and specifically in the > context of user generated content in SL, a TOS that appears to omit the more > encompassing patent peace clause is surprising. > > > > No doubt there is a reason for it, but I can?t see the intrusion of patent > protection into SL content as beneficial for innovation and advancement of > the VW concept at this early stage in the game. > > > > > > Regards > > > > *Jonathan Bishop** > **Managing Director* > > * * > > ** > > *Bishop Phillips Consulting* | Melbourne, Australia ? Vancouver, Canada > Mobile +61 411.404.483 | Office +61 (3) 9525.7066 | Fax +61 (3) 9525.6080 > bishopj at bishopphillips.com | www.bishopphillips.com** > > * * > > > > > ------------------------------ > > *From:* opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com [mailto: > opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] *On Behalf Of *Simon Disk > *Sent:* Thursday, 1 April 2010 11:48 PM > *To:* opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com > *Subject:* Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing > gone? > > > > Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under > Intelectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license > under IPR (and therefore also patent rights). > > > > Under section 4.1 it defines IPR as: > > > > "Intellectual Property Rights" means copyrights, trademarks, service marks, > trade dress, publicity rights, database rights, *patent rights*, and other > intellectual property rights or proprietary rights recognized by law. > > > > Then under section 7.1: > > > > You retain any and all *Intellectual Property Rights* you already hold > under applicable law in Content you upload, publish, and submit to or > through the Servers, Websites, and other areas of the Service, subject to > the rights, licenses, and other terms of this Agreement, including any > underlying rights of other users or Linden Lab in Content that you may use > or modify. > > > > Then under 7.2: > > > > You agree that by uploading, publishing, or submitting any Content to or > through the Servers, Websites, or other areas of the Service, you hereby > automatically grant Linden Lab a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, > sublicenseable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, > prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content solely for the > purposes of providing and promoting the Service. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/40e919aa/attachment.htm From lear.cale at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 09:35:47 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 12:35:47 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB39ED7.401@gmail.com> <4C76A5279AC348FBBDF71639E7A90ABA@neptune.priv> Message-ID: Oops, never mind -- yes it did. My mistake. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Lear Cale wrote: > The previous patent clause did not do what you claim it did. > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Jonathan Bishop < > bishopj at bishopphillips.com> wrote: > >> > Simon Disk: >> >> > Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under >> Intellectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license >> under IPR (and therefore also patent rights)? >> >> >> >> Yes. I agree. That seems to be the case. S4.1, S7.1, and S7.2, however >> don?t seem to do what the previous patent peace clause did however. This >> one entitles LL to deal with the IP, but it does not extinguish the right >> for an creator to assert patent rights over content with respect to the >> created content of other creators, so it does not seem to go as far in >> ensuring patent peace as the previous TOS. In fact by grouping patents with >> copyright and trademarks under IP it looks to me like it might have the >> opposite effect ? to actively endorse the establishment and assertion of >> such rights with respect to patents. >> >> >> >> I wonder if this was intended. There are strong arguments on both sides >> of the view, but given Ginsu Linden?s (Linden Lawyer) previous strong >> pronouncements against patents in software generally and specifically in the >> context of user generated content in SL, a TOS that appears to omit the more >> encompassing patent peace clause is surprising. >> >> >> >> No doubt there is a reason for it, but I can?t see the intrusion of patent >> protection into SL content as beneficial for innovation and advancement of >> the VW concept at this early stage in the game. >> >> >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> *Jonathan Bishop** >> **Managing Director* >> >> * * >> >> ** >> >> *Bishop Phillips Consulting* | Melbourne, Australia ? Vancouver, Canada >> Mobile +61 411.404.483 | Office +61 (3) 9525.7066 | Fax +61 (3) 9525.6080 >> bishopj at bishopphillips.com | www.bishopphillips.com** >> >> * * >> >> >> >> >> ------------------------------ >> >> *From:* opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com [mailto: >> opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] *On Behalf Of *Simon Disk >> *Sent:* Thursday, 1 April 2010 11:48 PM >> *To:* opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com >> *Subject:* Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing >> gone? >> >> >> >> Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under >> Intelectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license >> under IPR (and therefore also patent rights). >> >> >> >> Under section 4.1 it defines IPR as: >> >> >> >> "Intellectual Property Rights" means copyrights, trademarks, service >> marks, trade dress, publicity rights, database rights, *patent rights*, >> and other intellectual property rights or proprietary rights recognized by >> law. >> >> >> >> Then under section 7.1: >> >> >> >> You retain any and all *Intellectual Property Rights* you already hold >> under applicable law in Content you upload, publish, and submit to or >> through the Servers, Websites, and other areas of the Service, subject to >> the rights, licenses, and other terms of this Agreement, including any >> underlying rights of other users or Linden Lab in Content that you may use >> or modify. >> >> >> >> Then under 7.2: >> >> >> >> You agree that by uploading, publishing, or submitting any Content to or >> through the Servers, Websites, or other areas of the Service, you hereby >> automatically grant Linden Lab a non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, >> sublicenseable, and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, >> prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Content solely for the >> purposes of providing and promoting the Service. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/b81887dc/attachment-0001.htm From anders at arnholm.se Thu Apr 1 10:06:52 2010 From: anders at arnholm.se (Anders Arnholm) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 19:06:52 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BB4D2AC.8020306@arnholm.se> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Boy Lane skrev 2010-04-01 17.06: > And now Viewer 2.0 is the new holy grail. I really thought the 1.23 release > was bad. But now 2.0 even goes > against a major part of the resident population, handicapped people; > particular people with epilepsy/seizure disorders > (VWR-17249 - Viewer 2.0 is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities > Act). > http://jira.secondli If TPV banned from using as examples in the pJIRA now? http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-17249?focusedCommentId=178880&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3Acomment-tabpanel#action_178880 Alexa Linden added a comment - 30/Mar/10 11:44 AM - edited Please be aware, Linking to 3rd party viewers is not appropriate for Pjira. Comments doing so will be deleted. Thank you Some time the dooomsday telling this is all to kille the open source tpv feels like more and more true. / Balp -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2.0.12 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAku00qsACgkQtbR3SXmySrfb9wCfaleiUGKn6BoHnOY4AdXRB04L w1cAn074k6mPAN99UXzomxjeX4V9RvTS =cJ/E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 1 11:13:22 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 19:13:22 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: <201003301429.39986.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BB2196A.6060807@tamzap.com> <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Do you think griefers are going to care about the TPV, or any policy for that matter? On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > Linden Labs could care less about what you put in your viewer.? They are > concerned about their product, which is Second Life.? If YOUR viewer > connects to THEIR network, heck yeah you can be liable for it...maybe not in > the traditional sense, but you can agree you hold some responsibility for > your actions.? All that "legalese" is to prevent us, the developers, from > shrugging our shoulders and saying "Oops, my bad."? LL is covering their > backs.? Regardless of how you phrase it, code it, compile it...without the > Second Life service.? Your viewer is a brick. > > I don't know anyone's tenure here in SL, and I won't ask.? But, I remember > "real" grid crashes.? I remember before there was the grey goo fence and > people taking down the grid with the OFFICIAL SecondLife viewer. > > With Third-Party viewers coming into play and Linden Labs releasing more and > more bits of their service to the users, there has to be regulation and > restrictions in order to protect the business.? There is infinitely more > chance for something to go wrong when you throw third-party viewers in the > mix. > > Jonathan Irvin > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 06:04, Carlo Wood wrote: >> >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:52PM +0000, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra >> > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. >> >> That would be EXTREMELY against the spirit of open source and the use >> of GPL. It would also make it impossible for any TPV to use their code >> anymore: TPV's added patches that are pure-GPL. LL does not have copyright >> on those patches, so those remain GPL. Therefore it is not possible >> to link code resulting from those patches with code that is GPL+TPVP, >> which would be non-GPL because it has extra restrictions. >> >> Thus, if this is true (or if they'd do that in the future) then it is >> EXTERMELY important to understand; because it DOES mean that all TPV's >> have to stop using any additional code released by LL after 30 April 2010. >> >> -- >> 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 > > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 11:39:22 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 13:39:22 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: <201003301429.39986.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BB2196A.6060807@tamzap.com> <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Griefers...hah. I haven't seen a talented griefer in a while. While you are correct, people with malicious attempts have no regard for policies, it's still every much in Linden Lab's right to protect itself from those liabilities of allowing third-party viewers to connect to its service. It's no different than allowing people to connect to an open network and expecting them not to abuse it. You have to protect yourself. Jonathan Irvin On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 13:13, Gareth Nelson wrote: > Do you think griefers are going to care about the TPV, or any policy > for that matter? > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 5:09 PM, Jonathan Irvin > wrote: > > Linden Labs could care less about what you put in your viewer. They are > > concerned about their product, which is Second Life. If YOUR viewer > > connects to THEIR network, heck yeah you can be liable for it...maybe not > in > > the traditional sense, but you can agree you hold some responsibility for > > your actions. All that "legalese" is to prevent us, the developers, from > > shrugging our shoulders and saying "Oops, my bad." LL is covering their > > backs. Regardless of how you phrase it, code it, compile it...without > the > > Second Life service. Your viewer is a brick. > > > > I don't know anyone's tenure here in SL, and I won't ask. But, I > remember > > "real" grid crashes. I remember before there was the grey goo fence and > > people taking down the grid with the OFFICIAL SecondLife viewer. > > > > With Third-Party viewers coming into play and Linden Labs releasing more > and > > more bits of their service to the users, there has to be regulation and > > restrictions in order to protect the business. There is infinitely more > > chance for something to go wrong when you throw third-party viewers in > the > > mix. > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 06:04, Carlo Wood wrote: > >> > >> On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 04:06:52PM +0000, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> > LL as copyright holder (or joint holder) can change the GPL with extra > >> > restrictions as much as they like - so long as they make it clear. > >> > >> That would be EXTREMELY against the spirit of open source and the use > >> of GPL. It would also make it impossible for any TPV to use their code > >> anymore: TPV's added patches that are pure-GPL. LL does not have > copyright > >> on those patches, so those remain GPL. Therefore it is not possible > >> to link code resulting from those patches with code that is GPL+TPVP, > >> which would be non-GPL because it has extra restrictions. > >> > >> Thus, if this is true (or if they'd do that in the future) then it is > >> EXTERMELY important to understand; because it DOES mean that all TPV's > >> have to stop using any additional code released by LL after 30 April > 2010. > >> > >> -- > >> 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 > > > > > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/c91f74bd/attachment.htm From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 16:33:14 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 16:33:14 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB4D2AC.8020306@arnholm.se> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <4BB4D2AC.8020306@arnholm.se> Message-ID: <1270164794.3028.43.camel@RAGE> Okay, I'm going to try this one last time. When users sign into SL for the first time, they are asked to read and agree to the Terms of Service agreement. Included in the ToS is the Community Standards and now the TPV. *ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE READ AND AGREED TO BY THE END USER.* Saying something like "Well, you're not a lawyer, so how are you supposed to know what it REALLY means?" is disregarding the fact that users, NOT LAWYERS, are supposed to understand these documents. _IF WE CANNOT UNDERSTAND YOUR DOCUMENTS, WE CANNOT AGREE TO THEM._ No one is going to be rich enough enough to be able hire a lawyer to translate a document prior to playing a bloody MMORPG, especially a lawyer who specializes in copyright law. Someone commented earlier that the GPL was written in a way that programmers could understand. Guess why? BECAUSE PROGRAMMERS READ THE GPL AS IT'S AT THE TOP OF EVERY SOURCE-CODE FILE AND IS USUALLY DISPLAYED ON PROGRAM STARTUP. End-users typically do not NEED to read the GPL unless they're interested in distributing or modifying the sourcecode. Since the TPV DOES apply to programmers, distributors, and end-users, IT MUST BE WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND. If I were to make a ToS written in Chinese and present it to English-speaking users, how are the users expected to agree to it? tl;dr the ToS, TPV, and CS are all rules to be read, understood, and followed by the end user. You cannot expect us to go out and hire a lawyer every time we want to play a new game or develop for an open-source project. From q at lindenlab.com Thu Apr 1 17:44:08 2010 From: q at lindenlab.com (Kent Quirk (Q Linden)) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:44:08 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk to a lawyer. That's it. Q On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > An interesting point: > If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can > comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can > actually consent to agree to it. > > Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine wrote: >> On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language >> amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that >> programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV >> policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll >> repeat his words here for clarity: >> >> >> Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com >> Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 >> >> I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: >> >> Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not >> always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people >> who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you >> begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that >> isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled >> law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't >> be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other >> people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret >> program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially >> susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary >> because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have >> legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, >> not a mailing list. >> >> Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other >> could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden >> employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get >> further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't >> address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this >> list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden >> Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand >> up in court if they need it to. >> >> Q >> >> >> I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our >> ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could >> agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be >> required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law >> works in this area? >> >> The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by >> programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here >> understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL >> license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 >> clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no >> "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO >> WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream >> liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the >> conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). >> >> Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no >> longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and >> lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no other >> way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) >> >> That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they >> use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is >> happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, >> and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do something >> bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they >> are personally responsible for their actions. >> >> In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the >> best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible >> conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. >> >> >> Morgaine. >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 From darmath at tpg.com.au Thu Apr 1 18:01:35 2010 From: darmath at tpg.com.au (Darmath) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:01:35 +1100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <1270164794.3028.43.camel@RAGE> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <4BB4D2AC.8020306@arnholm.se> <1270164794.3028.43.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <4BB541EF.9080608@tpg.com.au> Being the one who made the comments I'll go on record to express my disagreement with the views here. I'm not going to elaborate why. I'm sure people would rather concentrate on technial matters rather than legal matters on this list. Anyone that wants to have a legal discussion with me is free to email me. Otherwise i'm going back to lurking on this list, trying to learn about software development issues. On 2/04/2010 10:33 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > Okay, I'm going to try this one last time. > > When users sign into SL for the first time, they are asked to read and > agree to the Terms of Service agreement. Included in the ToS is the > Community Standards and now the TPV. *ALL OF THESE DOCUMENTS ARE > SUPPOSED TO BE READ AND AGREED TO BY THE END USER.* > > Saying something like "Well, you're not a lawyer, so how are you > supposed to know what it REALLY means?" is disregarding the fact that > users, NOT LAWYERS, are supposed to understand these documents. _IF WE > CANNOT UNDERSTAND YOUR DOCUMENTS, WE CANNOT AGREE TO THEM._ No one is > going to be rich enough enough to be able hire a lawyer to translate a > document prior to playing a bloody MMORPG, especially a lawyer who > specializes in copyright law. > > Someone commented earlier that the GPL was written in a way that > programmers could understand. Guess why? BECAUSE PROGRAMMERS READ THE > GPL AS IT'S AT THE TOP OF EVERY SOURCE-CODE FILE AND IS USUALLY > DISPLAYED ON PROGRAM STARTUP. End-users typically do not NEED to read > the GPL unless they're interested in distributing or modifying the > sourcecode. > > Since the TPV DOES apply to programmers, distributors, and end-users, IT > MUST BE WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT THEY CAN UNDERSTAND. If I were to make a > ToS written in Chinese and present it to English-speaking users, how are > the users expected to agree to it? > > tl;dr the ToS, TPV, and CS are all rules to be read, understood, and > followed by the end user. You cannot expect us to go out and hire a > lawyer every time we want to play a new game or develop for an > open-source project. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 9.0.800 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2784 - Release Date: 04/02/10 05:32:00 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/b39664e3/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Thu Apr 1 18:57:08 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 03:57:08 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: <4BB2196A.6060807@tamzap.com> <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <20100402015708.GB5348@alinoe.com> On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 01:39:22PM -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > it's still > every much in Linden Lab's right to protect itself from those liabilities of > allowing third-party viewers to connect to its service. > > It's no different than allowing people to connect to an open network and > expecting them not to abuse it.? You have to protect yourself. Dude, wake up... It has been spelled out often now: If LL only wants to say "We are not liable" and/or "We can do anything to block TPVs", then SHOULD SAY SO! And *NOT* "if you are a Developer than you are liable, and responsible for any damages". Helloooo? -- Carlo Wood From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 19:10:04 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 21:10:04 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: <20100402015708.GB5348@alinoe.com> References: <94961D42-6402-4EE1-91F0-823440CEAE30@gmail.com> <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> <20100402015708.GB5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Keep in mind, it's not LL that's saying it, it is their lawyers. Like I said, LL is protecting their assets. The best way for them to do that is by hiring good lawyers who can cover all the bases. Jonathan Irvin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/40bffe50/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Thu Apr 1 19:34:21 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 04:34:21 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> 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). -- Carlo Wood From snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com Thu Apr 1 20:57:13 2010 From: snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com (Maya Remblai) Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 21:57:13 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> That all is true of pure OpenSim, but not necessarily true of OpenSim-compatible grids. ReactionGrid and InWorldz are OpenSim-compatible, meaning they use the same viewers and started with OpenSim code, but they've fixed many of the problems and are working to fix the others. Personally I favor InWorldz, and am now developing my avatars there before SL. Maya Carlo Wood wrote: > 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). > > From hakushakukun at gmail.com Thu Apr 1 20:16:07 2010 From: hakushakukun at gmail.com (Adric R) Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 20:16:07 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: <4ebfc1101003310906i6b9d688cja0cc16e0ef20cfef@mail.gmail.com> <20100401110413.GA5348@alinoe.com> <20100402015708.GB5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Regardless of LL's intentions, the TPV policy as currently written has certain problems that LL has seemingly decided not to address. Protecting their assets is one thing--and LL has every right to do so--but wielding a mallet against the opensource community in the process is quite another matter entirely. If LL wishes to have a productive ecosystem for viewers, I'm all for it. But the TPV policy creates the opposite. If anyone at LL is sad over the current situation, I hope they're speaking to their own legal team about fixing the legitimate issues that have been raised. Otherwise, TPV developers have to cover their bases, too (which in our case means ceasing to support connecting to Second Life). Regards, McCabe Maxsted http://www.imprudenceviewer.org On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:10 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > Keep in mind, it's not LL that's saying it, it is their lawyers. Like I > said, LL is protecting their assets. The best way for them to do that is by > hiring good lawyers who can cover all the bases. > > 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 > -- "Work is love made visible." ? Kahlil Gibran "We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason if we dig deep in our history and doctrine and remember that we are not descended from fearful men, not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes which were for the moment unpopular. We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of the Republic to abdicate his responsibility." -- Edward R. Murrow, March 9, 1954 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/e5a06cf2/attachment.htm From TammyNowotny at mac.com Thu Apr 1 21:42:04 2010 From: TammyNowotny at mac.com (Tammy Nowotny) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 00:42:04 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB5759C.8090601@mac.com> Well, a truly incomprehensible contract WOULD be unenforceable, just like an incomprehensible law. The new TOS agreement, however, is not incomprehensible. It's just plain complicated. The Lindens are obviously trying to walk a fine line between allowing 3rd Party Viewers and not being legally responsible for them. Anyone who is shocked by that is either naive or obtuse--- or both. --Tammy Nowotny Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. > 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk to a lawyer. That's it. > > Q > > > On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > >> An interesting point: >> If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can >> comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can >> actually consent to agree to it. >> >> Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine wrote: >> >>> On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language >>> amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that >>> programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV >>> policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll >>> repeat his words here for clarity: >>> >>> >>> Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com >>> Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 >>> >>> I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: >>> >>> Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not >>> always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people >>> who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you >>> begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that >>> isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled >>> law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't >>> be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other >>> people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret >>> program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially >>> susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary >>> because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have >>> legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, >>> not a mailing list. >>> >>> Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other >>> could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden >>> employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get >>> further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't >>> address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this >>> list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden >>> Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand >>> up in court if they need it to. >>> >>> Q >>> >>> >>> I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our >>> ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could >>> agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be >>> required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law >>> works in this area? >>> >>> The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by >>> programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here >>> understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL >>> license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 >>> clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no >>> "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO >>> WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream >>> liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the >>> conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). >>> >>> Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no >>> longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and >>> lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no other >>> way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) >>> >>> That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they >>> use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is >>> happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, >>> and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do something >>> bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they >>> are personally responsible for their actions. >>> >>> In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the >>> best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible >>> conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. >>> >>> >>> Morgaine. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> -- >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/f99cbbaa/attachment.htm From mike.dickson at hp.com Thu Apr 1 23:34:29 2010 From: mike.dickson at hp.com (Michael Dickson) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 01:34:29 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <1270190069.4306.17.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> You just enjoy making friends all over the map don't you? Mike On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 02:34 +0000, 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). > From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Fri Apr 2 00:28:32 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:28:32 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: <20100402015708.GB5348@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <201004020928.34186.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Am Freitag 02 April 2010 schrieb Jonathan Irvin: > Keep in mind, it's not LL that's saying it, it is their lawyers. > Like I said, LL is protecting their assets. The best way for them > to do that is by hiring good lawyers who can cover all the bases. > > Jonathan Irvin then why the eff didn't they do that? From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 04:03:47 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 12:03:47 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: <4BB5759C.8090601@mac.com> References: <4BB5759C.8090601@mac.com> Message-ID: Of course, the simple way to not be held liable for flaws in TPVs is to say to users "we do not support any viewer not developed by us, and you accept all liability for your use of any unsupported viewers". I don't think anyone is asking LL to accept liability for bugs in third party viewers, or asking for LL to tolerate obvious abuse such as sim crashers - but none of us here has perfect coding skills, so all of our code WILL be buggy at times. I've said before that personally, i'd only ever offer a warranty on my code if I was paid for it - offering a warranty on something infinitely reproducible is infinite liability otherwise.......... and LL are surprised by third party devs not wanting to accept infinite liability? The other thing they could do is produce a set of guidelines for developers, which must be complied with to be listed in the directory, and a warning to users that if a TPV developer is not willing to comply to these guidelines, then the viewer may cause trouble for anyone who use it. Removing the requirement to list RL contact details would also make more developers willing to list themselves in the directory - as it is, I can picture very very few residents are going to be naive enough to think "if it's not in the directory, it's not good". Q - You are correct that you don't speak for legal, but surely you can see how any member of staff at LL (whether that be yourself, one of the legal team or even M) saying that we should not try to interpret the policies your company would like to hold us to could cause problems in enforcing those policies. As it is, I personally find legalese relating to copyright ,TOS and software licensing matters fairly simple to understand and often have had actual lawyers confirming my understanding as correct, and I find the TPV policy rather simple to understand. I have not yet taken the document to a lawyer to review though, as i'm not willing to pay just to get a "yes, you were right - it'd make you liable" and I would not want to bog down the few pro-bono attorneys i'm aware of with this rather pointless work either (even if they would be willing to accept it). On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:42 AM, Tammy Nowotny wrote: > Well, a truly incomprehensible contract WOULD be unenforceable, just like an > incomprehensible law.? The new TOS agreement, however, is not > incomprehensible.? It's just plain complicated. > > The Lindens are obviously trying to walk a fine line between allowing 3rd > Party Viewers and not being legally responsible for them.? Anyone who is > shocked by that is either naive or obtuse--- or both. > > --Tammy Nowotny > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > > 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. > 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk > to a lawyer. That's it. > > Q > > > On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > > > An interesting point: > If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can > comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can > actually consent to agree to it. > > Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine > wrote: > > > On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language > amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that > programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV > policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. I'll > repeat his words here for clarity: > > > Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com > Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 > > I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: > > Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not > always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people > who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you > begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that > isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled > law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't > be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other > people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret > program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially > susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary > because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have > legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, > not a mailing list. > > Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other > could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden > employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get > further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't > address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this > list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden > Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand > up in court if they need it to. > > Q > > > I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our > ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could > agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be > required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law > works in this area? > > The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by > programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here > understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL > license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 > clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no > "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO > WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream > liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the > conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). > > Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no > longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and > lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no other > way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) > > That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they > use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is > happy to agree. (Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, > and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do something > bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they > are personally responsible for their actions. > > In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the > best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible > conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. > > > Morgaine. > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From carlo at alinoe.com Fri Apr 2 05:40:15 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:40:15 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> Message-ID: <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" opensim? On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:57:13PM -0600, Maya Remblai wrote: > That all is true of pure OpenSim, but not necessarily true of > OpenSim-compatible grids. ReactionGrid and InWorldz are > OpenSim-compatible, meaning they use the same viewers and started > with OpenSim code, but they've fixed many of the problems and are > working to fix the others. Personally I favor InWorldz, and am now > developing my avatars there before SL. > > Maya > > Carlo Wood wrote: > > >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). > > > -- Carlo Wood From jbhancroft at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 05:41:14 2010 From: jbhancroft at gmail.com (JB Hancroft) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 08:41:14 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we be more productive, please? Message-ID: Here are my thoughts: 1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not acting like one. The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, opinions that are based on something other than legal understanding and experience are more likely to contribute to the body of urban legend, than clarify and inform. The law is the law, and whether we like it or not, my understanding is that applying rationale to it's interpretation is a fool's errand. 2) If you've got a 3rd-party viewer, and the TPVP is an issue for you, then this isn't the forum in which to resolve it. Take it to Linden Lab via the legal system, with your legal counsel involved. 3) Second Life is a business; it's not "our" social cause. If you don't like the way things are, you certainly have a right to bitch and complain and lobby for change. But at some point, you're just going to annoy people. Linden Lab employees have already noted the "noise-to-signal ratio" they've observed in the process of extracting what they consider to be valid input and feedback. 4) If you want to argue as a hobby, please... enjoy. I'm asking that you please do it somewhere else. If you truly believe the situation with the TPVP is all evil and bad and not workable, then please "leave". If you don't like the game, don't play. Yes, there are many ways in which what I've written here can be argued and dissected and found lacking. Please... don't bother; spend your time in a more productive way. - JB -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/024f4f34/attachment.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 06:19:31 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 14:19:31 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from contributing patches to opensim On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" opensim? > > On Thu, Apr 01, 2010 at 09:57:13PM -0600, Maya Remblai wrote: >> That all is true of pure OpenSim, but not necessarily true of >> OpenSim-compatible grids. ReactionGrid and InWorldz are >> OpenSim-compatible, meaning they use the same viewers and started >> with OpenSim code, but they've fixed many of the problems and are >> working to fix the others. Personally I favor InWorldz, and am now >> developing my avatars there before SL. >> >> Maya >> >> Carlo Wood wrote: >> >> >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). >> > >> > > -- > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From aleric.inglewood at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 06:36:45 2010 From: aleric.inglewood at gmail.com (Aleric Inglewood) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:36:45 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we, open source devs, still support Snowglobe? was: Can we be more productive, please? Message-ID: Clearly, no open source developer can accept the possibility to be held liable for their help, by supplying patches. Therefore, we CANNOT agree with the TPV policy unless we understand its implications, as explained by a real lawyer, preferably one of Linden Lab, where it is made clear that developers are not liable for 1) bugs, 2) what others do with their source code, aka the general idea of the GPL. Until that has been established, officially, I do NOT agree with the TPV policy. DISCLAIMER: When I got the pop-up that asked me to agree I made a point of it to NOT accept it, but spend first an hour to write a patch that made it possible for me to click on 'cancel' and still login. I then removed that patch again (and can still log in). Since the TOS/TPVp isn't effective as of 30 April, this is not an illegal thing to do. If I do not get another pop-up at 30 April (and I predict I won't), then I will still not have agreed to the TPV policy. Nevertheless, this is a very undesirable situation of course. So, indeed as JB Hancroft says (who sounds like a Linden with a gmail account :p ), it's better to leave completely. Leave SL, and obviously also stop helping to improve the viewer code. Unfortunately, if it would only be me it will have no effect and will be useless: I would only harm myself because I like using SL and I like working on snowglobe AND we know that Linden Lab *really* only wants something that we (and I) CAN agree with. It's just that they didn't restrict themselves to the real goal of the TPVp. This whole conflict is utterly unnecessary! Hence, leaving without that that would result in Linden Lab fixing this situation and changing the TPVp (or have an official lawyer statement that we can understand and agree with) would be too ridiculous for words. However, I *am* prepared to do this if I'm not the only one. I have not seen the real contributors, Robin, Boroondas, Dzonatas, Techwolf, Thickbrick (the *currently* most active ones that I know from IRC / my timezone) say much on this topic. But it's your collective feeling (and action) that will count here. 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? PS LL, please don't tell me this should be posted on this list. because it "calls for ... something you don't like. I'd rather use this list and discuss it in the open, with everyone involved, than approach all the devs off-list. Or set up a new mailinglist without Lindens on it. Seems really the right thing to do. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM, JB Hancroft wrote: > Here are my thoughts: > > 1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not > acting like one. > The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, opinions > that are based on something other than legal understanding and > experience > are more likely to contribute to the body of urban legend, than clarify > and inform. > The law is the law, and whether we like it or not, my understanding is > that > applying rationale to it's interpretation is a fool's errand. > > 2) If you've got a 3rd-party viewer, and the TPVP is an issue for you, then > this isn't > the forum in which to resolve it. Take it to Linden Lab via the legal > system, with your legal counsel involved. > > 3) Second Life is a business; it's not "our" social cause. If you don't > like the way > things are, you certainly have a right to bitch and complain and lobby > for change. > But at some point, you're just going to annoy people. Linden Lab > employees > have already noted the "noise-to-signal ratio" they've observed in the > process of > extracting what they consider to be valid input and feedback. > > 4) If you want to argue as a hobby, please... enjoy. I'm asking that you > please do it > somewhere else. If you truly believe the situation with the TPVP is > all evil and > bad and not workable, then please "leave". If you don't like the > game, don't play. > > Yes, there are many ways in which what I've written here can be argued and > dissected > and found lacking. Please... don't bother; spend your time in a more > productive way. > > - JB > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/a4fe0873/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Fri Apr 2 06:38:11 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:38:11 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <20100402133811.GB26855@alinoe.com> That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: > If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from > contributing patches to opensim -- Carlo Wood From jbhancroft at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 06:52:23 2010 From: jbhancroft at gmail.com (JB Hancroft) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:52:23 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we, open source devs, still support Snowglobe? was: Can we be more productive, please? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Sorry to disappoint you, Aleric... I am not a Linden... just me :) I run a software and consulting business in the virtual world/virtual space market, that is focused primarily (95% +/-) on SL, at the moment. That number is likely to decrease over time, as more and more viable alternatives for my customers come online. - JB On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Aleric Inglewood wrote: > Clearly, no open source developer can accept the possibility to be held > liable for their help, by supplying patches. > > Therefore, we CANNOT agree with the TPV policy unless we understand > its implications, as explained by a real lawyer, preferably one of Linden > Lab, > where it is made clear that developers are not liable for 1) bugs, 2) what > others > do with their source code, aka the general idea of the GPL. > > Until that has been established, officially, I do NOT agree with the TPV > policy. > DISCLAIMER: > When I got the pop-up that asked me to agree I made a point of it to NOT > accept it, but spend first an hour to write a patch that made it possible > for > me to click on 'cancel' and still login. I then removed that patch again > (and > can still log in). Since the TOS/TPVp isn't effective as of 30 April, this > is > not an illegal thing to do. If I do not get another pop-up at 30 April (and > I > predict I won't), then I will still not have agreed to the TPV policy. > > Nevertheless, this is a very undesirable situation of course. So, indeed > as JB Hancroft says (who sounds like a Linden with a gmail account :p ), > it's better to leave completely. Leave SL, and obviously also stop helping > to improve the viewer code. Unfortunately, if it would only be me it will > have > no effect and will be useless: I would only harm myself because I like > using SL and I like working on snowglobe AND we know that Linden Lab > *really* only wants something that we (and I) CAN agree with. It's just > that they didn't restrict themselves to the real goal of the TPVp. This > whole conflict is utterly unnecessary! > > Hence, leaving without that that would result in Linden Lab fixing this > situation and changing the TPVp (or have an official lawyer statement > that we can understand and agree with) would be too ridiculous for > words. > > However, I *am* prepared to do this if I'm not the only one. > > I have not seen the real contributors, Robin, Boroondas, Dzonatas, > Techwolf, Thickbrick (the *currently* most active ones that I know from > IRC / my timezone) say much on this topic. But it's your collective > feeling (and action) that will count here. > > 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? > > PS LL, please don't tell me this should be posted on this list. > because it "calls for ... something you don't like. I'd rather use > this list and discuss it in the open, with everyone involved, > than approach all the devs off-list. Or set up a new mailinglist without > Lindens on it. Seems really the right thing to do. > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM, JB Hancroft wrote: > >> Here are my thoughts: >> >> 1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not >> acting like one. >> The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, opinions >> that are based on something other than legal understanding and >> experience >> are more likely to contribute to the body of urban legend, than >> clarify and inform. >> The law is the law, and whether we like it or not, my understanding is >> that >> applying rationale to it's interpretation is a fool's errand. >> >> 2) If you've got a 3rd-party viewer, and the TPVP is an issue for you, >> then this isn't >> the forum in which to resolve it. Take it to Linden Lab via the >> legal >> system, with your legal counsel involved. >> >> 3) Second Life is a business; it's not "our" social cause. If you don't >> like the way >> things are, you certainly have a right to bitch and complain and lobby >> for change. >> But at some point, you're just going to annoy people. Linden Lab >> employees >> have already noted the "noise-to-signal ratio" they've observed in the >> process of >> extracting what they consider to be valid input and feedback. >> >> 4) If you want to argue as a hobby, please... enjoy. I'm asking that you >> please do it >> somewhere else. If you truly believe the situation with the TPVP is >> all evil and >> bad and not workable, then please "leave". If you don't like the >> game, don't play. >> >> Yes, there are many ways in which what I've written here can be argued and >> dissected >> and found lacking. Please... don't bother; spend your time in a more >> productive way. >> >> - JB >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/f36c2151/attachment-0001.htm From chess at us.ibm.com Fri Apr 2 07:00:31 2010 From: chess at us.ibm.com (David M Chess) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 10:00:31 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Jonathan Irvin : > Keep in mind, it's not LL that's saying it, it is their lawyers. Like I said, LL is protecting their assets. The best way for them to do that is by hiring good lawyers who can cover all the bases. This is wrong enough that I can't resist responding. :) The TPVP isn't signed "some lawyers who also happen to work for Linden Lab". It is official LL policy, and published as such. If the question is whether people should hold individual Linden employees personally responsible for it, yeah probably not. But the Lab as a whole has made the collective decision to make this Lab policy. "The lawyers made us say it" might be a good excuse if used by an individual employee, but it's not something that the Lab as a whole can say, or that it makes any sense for anyone else to say on their behalf. Legal departments, even good ones, have a tendency to give advice calculated to minimize the probability of harm occurring -in the form of lawsuits-; that's basically their job. It's up to the business managers that the legal department advises to weigh the dangers of that sort of harm against the dangers of other sorts of harm (like a reduced TPV ecosystem, annoyed or confused or alienated users, etc). There are good reasons that the head of the legal department in a company is seldom the CEO. In this particular case, if the user and TPV developer communities can, rationally and responsibly, make the Lab aware of negative aspects of the current TPVP wording that might outweigh the reasons the wording was drafted that way in the first place, I'm sure the wording can be changed, whatever some particular employee may have send in the interwebs... Dave Chess / Dale Innis [All statements herein represent my own opinions (at most), and are not official or unofficial statements of anyone else, including for example and without restriction my employer, IBM, the United States Government, the International Red Cross, General Motors, General Electric, the International Bank of Credit and Commerce, Nabisco, Acme Pet Supplies, Mattel, AIG, the United States Postal Service, McDonald?s, Linden Research, the Supreme Council 33? of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, the United Nations Security Council, Wham-O, and Britney Spears.] -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/20cdf9fd/attachment.htm From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 07:05:52 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:05:52 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we be more productive, please? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Jonathan Irvin Cell: +1-318-426-5253 Email: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 07:41, JB Hancroft wrote: > Here are my thoughts: > > 1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not > acting like one. > The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, opinions > that are based on something other than legal understanding and > experience > are more likely to contribute to the body of urban legend, than clarify > and inform. > The law is the law, and whether we like it or not, my understanding is > that > applying rationale to it's interpretation is a fool's errand. > Well said. > > 2) If you've got a 3rd-party viewer, and the TPVP is an issue for you, then > this isn't > the forum in which to resolve it. Take it to Linden Lab via the legal > system, with your legal counsel involved. > I agree. Opensource-dev is about opensource development, not pissing contests on whose opinion is more valid. > > 3) Second Life is a business; it's not "our" social cause. If you don't > like the way > things are, you certainly have a right to bitch and complain and lobby > for change. > But at some point, you're just going to annoy people. Linden Lab > employees > have already noted the "noise-to-signal ratio" they've observed in the > process of > extracting what they consider to be valid input and feedback. > People don't seem to understand that SecondLife is not their business...it is Linden Lab's. While we can provide feedback, it is still LL's decision on whether or not to act on that feedback. People just like to get angry about things and I feel bad for LL having to deal with it's extremely passionate userbase. > > 4) If you want to argue as a hobby, please... enjoy. I'm asking that you > please do it > somewhere else. If you truly believe the situation with the TPVP is > all evil and > bad and not workable, then please "leave". If you don't like the > game, don't play. > We need a forum, not LL Related to just vent so flaming can get lost in a forum not in a mailing list. > > Yes, there are many ways in which what I've written here can be argued and > dissected > and found lacking. Please... don't bother; spend your time in a more > productive way. > > - JB > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/3f12fb99/attachment.htm From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 07:09:06 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:09:06 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we, open source devs, still support Snowglobe? was: Can we be more productive, please? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Linden or not, your feedback is appreciated. Jonathan Irvin On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 08:52, JB Hancroft wrote: > Sorry to disappoint you, Aleric... I am not a Linden... just me :) > > I run a software and consulting business in the virtual world/virtual space > market, that > is focused primarily (95% +/-) on SL, at the moment. That number is likely > to decrease > over time, as more and more viable alternatives for my customers come > online. > > - JB > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:36 AM, Aleric Inglewood < > aleric.inglewood at gmail.com> wrote: > >> Clearly, no open source developer can accept the possibility to be held >> liable for their help, by supplying patches. >> >> Therefore, we CANNOT agree with the TPV policy unless we understand >> its implications, as explained by a real lawyer, preferably one of Linden >> Lab, >> where it is made clear that developers are not liable for 1) bugs, 2) what >> others >> do with their source code, aka the general idea of the GPL. >> >> Until that has been established, officially, I do NOT agree with the TPV >> policy. >> DISCLAIMER: >> When I got the pop-up that asked me to agree I made a point of it to NOT >> accept it, but spend first an hour to write a patch that made it possible >> for >> me to click on 'cancel' and still login. I then removed that patch again >> (and >> can still log in). Since the TOS/TPVp isn't effective as of 30 April, this >> is >> not an illegal thing to do. If I do not get another pop-up at 30 April >> (and I >> predict I won't), then I will still not have agreed to the TPV policy. >> >> Nevertheless, this is a very undesirable situation of course. So, indeed >> as JB Hancroft says (who sounds like a Linden with a gmail account :p ), >> it's better to leave completely. Leave SL, and obviously also stop helping >> to improve the viewer code. Unfortunately, if it would only be me it will >> have >> no effect and will be useless: I would only harm myself because I like >> using SL and I like working on snowglobe AND we know that Linden Lab >> *really* only wants something that we (and I) CAN agree with. It's just >> that they didn't restrict themselves to the real goal of the TPVp. This >> whole conflict is utterly unnecessary! >> >> Hence, leaving without that that would result in Linden Lab fixing this >> situation and changing the TPVp (or have an official lawyer statement >> that we can understand and agree with) would be too ridiculous for >> words. >> >> However, I *am* prepared to do this if I'm not the only one. >> >> I have not seen the real contributors, Robin, Boroondas, Dzonatas, >> Techwolf, Thickbrick (the *currently* most active ones that I know from >> IRC / my timezone) say much on this topic. But it's your collective >> feeling (and action) that will count here. >> >> 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? >> >> PS LL, please don't tell me this should be posted on this list. >> because it "calls for ... something you don't like. I'd rather use >> this list and discuss it in the open, with everyone involved, >> than approach all the devs off-list. Or set up a new mailinglist >> without >> Lindens on it. Seems really the right thing to do. >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:41 PM, JB Hancroft wrote: >> >>> Here are my thoughts: >>> >>> 1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not >>> acting like one. >>> The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, >>> opinions >>> that are based on something other than legal understanding and >>> experience >>> are more likely to contribute to the body of urban legend, than >>> clarify and inform. >>> The law is the law, and whether we like it or not, my understanding >>> is that >>> applying rationale to it's interpretation is a fool's errand. >>> >>> 2) If you've got a 3rd-party viewer, and the TPVP is an issue for you, >>> then this isn't >>> the forum in which to resolve it. Take it to Linden Lab via the >>> legal >>> system, with your legal counsel involved. >>> >>> 3) Second Life is a business; it's not "our" social cause. If you don't >>> like the way >>> things are, you certainly have a right to bitch and complain and >>> lobby for change. >>> But at some point, you're just going to annoy people. Linden Lab >>> employees >>> have already noted the "noise-to-signal ratio" they've observed in >>> the process of >>> extracting what they consider to be valid input and feedback. >>> >>> 4) If you want to argue as a hobby, please... enjoy. I'm asking that you >>> please do it >>> somewhere else. If you truly believe the situation with the TPVP is >>> all evil and >>> bad and not workable, then please "leave". If you don't like the >>> game, don't play. >>> >>> Yes, there are many ways in which what I've written here can be argued >>> and dissected >>> and found lacking. Please... don't bother; spend your time in a more >>> productive way. >>> >>> - JB >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/59d0003d/attachment-0001.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 07:21:58 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:21:58 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100402133811.GB26855@alinoe.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <20100402133811.GB26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: That's one possible reason, other possible reasons are simply lack of willingness to submit the patches On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> contributing patches to opensim > > -- > Carlo Wood > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 07:23:52 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:23:52 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] A note on preserving "NO WARRANTY" for SL TPV developers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 09:00, David M Chess wrote: > > Jonathan Irvin : > > > Keep in mind, it's not LL that's saying it, it is their lawyers. Like I > said, LL is protecting their assets. The best way for them to do that is by > hiring good lawyers who can cover all the bases. > > This is wrong enough that I can't resist responding. :) > Good point. It is LL that is dishing out the policy, but my point is that it's written in Legal language, not that of a geek. So naturally, there is going to be a language barrier there. As far as the wording goes, look at any terms of service, EULA, Warranty, Privacy Policy, etc... it's never really going to be fully understood by people that don't know the lingo. But nevertheless, your input was valid and appreciated. Though your opinions do not reflect the company you work for or Britney Spears, I'm sure that IBM has a great culture so it's reflected in your post. Thank you. > > The TPVP isn't signed "some lawyers who also happen to work for Linden > Lab". It is official LL policy, and published as such. > > If the question is whether people should hold individual Linden employees > personally responsible for it, yeah probably not. But the Lab as a whole > has made the collective decision to make this Lab policy. > > "The lawyers made us say it" might be a good excuse if used by an > individual employee, but it's not something that the Lab as a whole can say, > or that it makes any sense for anyone else to say on their behalf. > > Legal departments, even good ones, have a tendency to give advice > calculated to minimize the probability of harm occurring -in the form of > lawsuits-; that's basically their job. It's up to the business managers > that the legal department advises to weigh the dangers of that sort of harm > against the dangers of other sorts of harm (like a reduced TPV ecosystem, > annoyed or confused or alienated users, etc). > > There are good reasons that the head of the legal department in a company > is seldom the CEO. > > In this particular case, if the user and TPV developer communities can, > rationally and responsibly, make the Lab aware of negative aspects of the > current TPVP wording that might outweigh the reasons the wording was drafted > that way in the first place, I'm sure the wording can be changed, whatever > some particular employee may have send in the interwebs... > > Dave Chess / Dale Innis > > [All statements herein represent my own opinions (at most), and are not > official or unofficial statements of anyone else, including for example and > without restriction my employer, IBM, the United States Government, the > International Red Cross, General Motors, General Electric, the International > Bank of Credit and Commerce, Nabisco, Acme Pet Supplies, Mattel, AIG, the > United States Postal Service, McDonald?s, Linden Research, the Supreme > Council 33? of Scottish Rite Freemasonry, the United Nations Security > Council, Wham-O, and Britney Spears.] > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/43022138/attachment.htm From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 07:27:57 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 09:27:57 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <20100402133811.GB26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Makes sense if you ask me... why submit patches for SnowGlobe when you already know other Third-Party viewers work with OpenSim...plus I image these guys have enough on their plate as it is getting OpenSim out of alpha. Jonathan Irvin On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 09:21, Gareth Nelson wrote: > That's one possible reason, other possible reasons are simply lack of > willingness to submit the patches > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > > That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? > > > > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from > >> contributing patches to opensim > > > > -- > > Carlo Wood > > > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/29b9172e/attachment.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 07:50:28 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 15:50:28 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <20100402133811.GB26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: You perhaps misunderstood me - I was referring to submitting patches to opensim. Sadly, unless the current opensim team change their minds, I do not see tight cooperation between viewer developers and opensim developers happening, as for efficiency it would be best for people to be able to contribute to both viewer and sim. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > Makes sense if you ask me... why submit patches for SnowGlobe when you > already know other Third-Party viewers work with OpenSim...plus I image > these guys have enough on their plate as it is getting OpenSim out of alpha. > > Jonathan Irvin > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 09:21, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> That's one possible reason, other possible reasons are simply lack of >> willingness to submit the patches >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 2:38 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >> > That is an 'if', what is the actual reason? >> > >> > On Fri, Apr 02, 2010 at 02:19:31PM +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> >> contributing patches to opensim >> > >> > -- >> > Carlo Wood >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From dmahalko at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 08:00:25 2010 From: dmahalko at gmail.com (Dale Mahalko) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 10:00:25 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I am not a lawyer. I don't know how the whole business model of lawyers and fees work. This whole "talk to a lawyer" boilerplate response raises questions related to lawyer fees, that do not appear to be well known.. Can individuals actually talk directly to Linden's TOS lawyers without paying a fee of some sort? Probably the huge corporate lawyer being asked the question wants a fairly sizable fee to provide that answer, possibly $100 to $1000 per hour. It is not clear to me what happens when an outside person wants to talk to a lawyer employed by some company. The lawyer might bill the questioner for asking the question and bill the company for clarifying the answer. What does it cost per minute to call LL's TOS lawyers on the phone and discuss the issues? Will they even do such an informal form of communication with a potentially hostile questioner? I suspect a lawyer would never willingly submit to having such a phone call recorded, for later transcribing and publishing by the questioner on a mailing list like this. I don't know if an individual can even directly talk to a company's lawyer and get an answer they understand. If lawyers wrote the TOS in "legalese" then their response to people not employed by the company might also be in written legalese. It may be necessary for the questioner to hire their own lawyer ($$) to write a proper legalese question to be submitted for answering by the company lawyer (who likely wants to get paid from someone for answering... the individual, again? The company?) And then your individual lawyer interprets the corporate legalese response back in to normal human format, for yet another fee. This is all conjecture. But it seems possible that if people on this mailing list want to ask direct questions of LL's TOS lawyers and get direct answers for this free open source project, the questioners may need to have some deep pockets and be willing to blow a few thousand to get those answers. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 7:44 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. > 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk to a lawyer. That's it. From chess at us.ibm.com Fri Apr 2 08:21:46 2010 From: chess at us.ibm.com (David M Chess) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 11:21:46 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dale Mahalko : ... > Can individuals actually talk directly to Linden's TOS lawyers without > paying a fee of some sort? I don't think anyone meant to suggest that people should try to talk directly to LL's lawyers; as you say, that's unlikely to be feasible. The idea, I believe, is that if (say) some TPV developer is worried that the TPVP might make them liable for something, they should take it to their own lawyer, and say "I'm doing this-and-such, and there's this cryptic legalese here that says this-and-this, is this likely to be a problem for me?". And you're right that will generally cost money (lawyers hate it when ppl come up to them at parties and ask stuff like that expecting a free answer :) ). I'm personally not fond of the whole "only lawyers should bother reading or commenting on legal documents" thing, myself. It's certainly true that if you assume that words in legal documents have just their usual English meanings, you'll get the actual meaning wrong pretty often (my favorite example being "hold harmless"). But for policies like the TPVP that are intended to be read and agreed to by large numbers of customers (unlike, say, a one-to-one contract between companies that each have their own legal teams), it's really in everyone's interest that the language be both legally correct *and* clear to the layman. It doesn't benefit anyone, including the Lab, to have it misunderstood by anyone. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/3167998c/attachment-0001.htm From snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com Fri Apr 2 09:28:28 2010 From: snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com (Maya Remblai) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 10:28:28 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BB61B2C.8060704@dragonkeepcreations.com> Beats me, honestly. I'm not a coder, I'm just a content creator. My guess is the OpenSim project has its own plans and doesn't go looking for code elsewhere, they only take what's given to them. Which makes sense given the number of grids. But I really don't know the reason, I was just pointing out my own experiences. Maya Carlo Wood wrote: > What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" opensim? > > From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 2 08:21:31 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 23:21:31 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Case closed. Was: Re: Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions Message-ID: <001201cad278$2e5c9b90$6801a8c0@hp> Case closed. -1 http://my.opera.com/boylane/blog/rainbow-viewer-endgame-release-5-the-final ----- Original Message ----- From: "Boy Lane" To: "Morgaine" Cc: Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2010 11:06 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions > Clearly NO. > > Honestly, I don't know why this matters anymore. Everything was said. > Linden made it clear they'll stick to their > TPV "guns". > > Four viewer projects announced they discontinue support for SL, that is > Imprudence, RealXtend, Luna and Rainbow. > > Some other people still hang on but probably not for long. That's leaving > only two graphical 3rd party viewer > projects around, both with a shady gray past in terms of intentional > producing malicious clients or violating > software licenses. I see a great future ahead... > > And now Viewer 2.0 is the new holy grail. I really thought the 1.23 > release was bad. But now 2.0 even goes > against a major part of the resident population, handicapped people; > particular people with epilepsy/seizure disorders > (VWR-17249 - Viewer 2.0 is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities > Act). > http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-17249 > > What are you still doing here? > > Boy > > >> Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 09:42:24 +0100 >> From: Morgaine >> Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible >> conditions? >> To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com >> Message-ID: >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> On 21st March, Q Linden explained to >> usthat >> legalese is not a language amenable to "common sense" interpretation, >> and more specifically, that programmers like ourselves should not expect >> to >> understand this Linden TPV policy document using our normal logic and our >> normal dictionary. I'll repeat his words here for clarity: >> >> >> * Kent Quirk (Q Linden)* q at lindenlab.com >> >> *Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010* >> >> >> - I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. >> But: >> >> >> - Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and >> it's >> not always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers >> as >> people who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy >> compiler, >> and you begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a >> lot of >> law that isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the >> existing settled law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, >> you >> probably shouldn't be attempting to interpret legal documents -- >> especially >> not for other people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting >> to >> interpret program source code is a risky business. Programmers are >> especially susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a >> normal >> dictionary because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. >> If >> you have legal questions about the implication of documents, you should >> ask >> a lawyer, not a mailing list. >> >> >> - Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or >> any >> other could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for >> Linden employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're >> unlikely to >> get further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that >> don't address specific questions. The policy was revised based on >> comments >> on this list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication >> that >> Linden Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent >> and to >> stand up in court if they need it to. >> >> >> - Q >> >> >> >> I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to >> our >> ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person >> could >> agree to something unknown, except under duress. Is it even legal to be >> required to agree to the incomprehensible? Does anyone know how the law >> works in this area? >> >> The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood >> by >> programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here >> understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL >> license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that >> GPLv2 >> clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. Therefore there are no >> "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the >> "NO >> WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream >> liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the >> conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). >> >> Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no >> longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms >> and >> lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. (It could be no >> other >> way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) >> >> That leaves only the matter of *users* of TPVs behaving responsibly when >> they use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list >> is >> happy to agree. (Note that developers become *users* when they connect >> to >> SL, and are bound by the same requirements as users.) When users do >> something bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then >> naturally they are personally responsible for their actions. >> >> In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is >> the >> best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible >> conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. >> >> >> Morgaine. >> -------------- next part -------------- >> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >> URL: >> http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100401/56073eae/attachment.htm > From secret.argent at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 08:38:21 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 10:38:21 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: > If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from > contributing patches to opensim > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >> opensim? From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 08:49:16 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 16:49:16 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. > > On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >> contributing patches to opensim >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>> >>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>> opensim? > > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From gcanaday at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 09:51:55 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 12:51:55 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> They won't accept viewer developers because the viewer is GPL and they want to be absolutely sure that only BSD code gets in. If the viewer code weren't virally licensed (as the GPL is), they'd probably be more than happy to accept viewer-developer patches. Geeked as all get-out, I'd imagine. It's the same reason why they will not accept patches from 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. It's a good thing I haven't had time to view the code itself so I'm still open to choose a project. Though I *HAVE* decided that I will not work on a TPV... it's Snowglobe if it's going to be anything viewer 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. I dunno about mono, though. I'm not too keen on learning yet another language. My brain's kinda full as it is and I would LOVE to branch the viewer into UI, rendering, network, and DB modules so that any one module can be upgraded at any time without any significant impact on any other. --GC On 04/02/2010 11:49 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to > convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter > wrote: > >> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >> >> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >> >>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>> contributing patches to opensim >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>> >>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>> opensim? >>>> >> >> > > > From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 10:09:32 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 18:09:32 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> Message-ID: I know the reason they won't accept patches from viewer devs, but it's a nonsensical reason. Merely viewing the viewer source code does not mean any code you write later on must be GPLed - something which 3 different attorneys confirmed. This is something fairly basic in copyright law - it covers expression in fixed form, not ideas or abstract concepts. On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 5:51 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > They won't accept viewer developers because the viewer is GPL and they > want to be absolutely sure that only BSD code gets in. If the viewer > code weren't virally licensed (as the GPL is), they'd probably be more > than happy to accept viewer-developer patches. Geeked as all get-out, > I'd imagine. It's the same reason why they will not accept patches from > 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. > > It's a good thing I haven't had time to view the code itself so I'm > still open to choose a project. Though I *HAVE* decided that I will not > work on a TPV... it's Snowglobe if it's going to be anything viewer > 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. > > I dunno about mono, though. I'm not too keen on learning yet another > language. My brain's kinda full as it is and I would LOVE to branch the > viewer into UI, rendering, network, and DB modules so that any one > module can be upgraded at any time without any significant impact on any > other. > > --GC > > On 04/02/2010 11:49 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter >> ?wrote: >> >>> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >>> >>> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >>> >>> >>>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>>> contributing patches to opensim >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood ?wrote: >>>> >>>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>>> opensim? >>>>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From secret.argent at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 10:12:02 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 12:12:02 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: Starting a fork can light a fire under a parochial developer team. It worked for GCC with EGCS. On 2010-04-02, at 10:49, Gareth Nelson wrote: > It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to > convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter > wrote: >> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >> >> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> >>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>> contributing patches to opensim >>> >>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>>> >>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>> opensim? >> >> > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html "Welcome back, Anonymous, we're glad to see you again!" From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 2 10:12:52 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 18:12:52 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: It can, but only if the fork has enough developers working on it instead of the original - and that's the trickiest part On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 6:12 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Starting a fork can light a fire under a parochial developer team. It worked > for GCC with EGCS. > > > On 2010-04-02, at 10:49, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. >> >> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:38 PM, Argent Stonecutter >> wrote: >>> >>> Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. >>> >>> On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: >>> >>>> If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from >>>> contributing patches to opensim >>>> >>>> On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" >>>>> opensim? >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > > "Welcome back, Anonymous, we're glad to see you again!" > > > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From secret.argent at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 10:22:22 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 12:22:22 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> Message-ID: <30A798D0-7011-41C1-B34C-F9580666F815@gmail.com> On 2010-04-02, at 11:51, Glen Canaday wrote: > 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. That's why you have to transfer the copyright to LL when you send them code, because that way they're not constrained to use the GPL in their internal codebase. From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 14:37:53 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Fri, 02 Apr 2010 14:37:53 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <1270244273.3028.46.camel@RAGE> I have one for working on Voxel terrain (which will also completely break compatibility with SL). Lol, losing power. On Fri, 2010-04-02 at 10:38 -0500, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Sounds like an "impure opensim" fork is needed. > > On 2010-04-02, at 08:19, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > > If these people also work on the viewer, they're banned from > > contributing patches to opensim > > > > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 1:40 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > >> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure" > >> opensim? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From merov at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 2 20:26:42 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 20:26:42 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 Message-ID: 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100402/84515cf5/attachment.htm From sempuki1 at gmail.com Fri Apr 2 23:58:17 2010 From: sempuki1 at gmail.com (Ryan McDougall) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 09:58:17 +0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 3:44 AM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden) wrote: > 1) The first line of my comment is that I don't speak for Linden legal. Right. > 2) What I said was that if you want to understand legalese, you should talk to a lawyer. That's it. Seriously, how many developers can realistically to do that? That said, I find the language TPVP itself is pretty clear. The only confusing part is how you can make it apply to *developers* somehow. Totally unprecedented; the GPL applies to the source, and the TOS apply to anyone who connects to SL -- what on earth has LL legal given birth to here? FUD own-goal. > > ? ? ? ?Q Cheers, > > > On Apr 1, 2010, at 4:54 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > >> An interesting point: >> If a member of staff at LL is basically saying "none of you can >> comprehend this policy", then that surely means none of us can >> actually consent to agree to it. >> >> Q - you may have just provided some "fuel" for use in any future court case >> >> On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Morgaine wrote: >>> On 21st March, Q Linden explained to us that legalese is not a language >>> amenable to "common sense" interpretation, and more specifically, that >>> programmers like ourselves should not expect to understand this Linden TPV >>> policy document using our normal logic and our normal dictionary. ?I'll >>> repeat his words here for clarity: >>> >>> >>> ? ? Kent Quirk (Q Linden) q at lindenlab.com >>> ? ? Sun Mar 21 10:24:13 PDT 2010 >>> >>> I'm emphatically not a lawyer and I don't speak for our legal team. But: >>> >>> Legalese is a specialized language. It's not strictly English, and it's not >>> always amenable to "common sense" interpretation. Think of lawyers as people >>> who write code in an underspecified language for a buggy compiler, and you >>> begin to understand why legalese is the way it is. There's a lot of law that >>> isn't stated, but is actually implied by the context of the existing settled >>> law. What that means is that if you're not a lawyer, you probably shouldn't >>> be attempting to interpret legal documents -- especially not for other >>> people. Similarly, if you're not a programmer, attempting to interpret >>> program source code is a risky business. Programmers are especially >>> susceptible to trying to interpret legal documents using a normal dictionary >>> because they're logical thinkers. That doesn't always work. If you have >>> legal questions about the implication of documents, you should ask a lawyer, >>> not a mailing list. >>> >>> Similarly, any comment by one of Linden's lawyers in this forum or any other >>> could possibly be treated as legally binding. That also goes for Linden >>> employees, especially those with any seniority. So you're unlikely to get >>> further remarks or "clarifications", except general statements that don't >>> address specific questions. The policy was revised based on comments on this >>> list and elsewhere. That's probably a pretty good indication that Linden >>> Lab's lawyers now think it's clear enough to state its intent and to stand >>> up in court if they need it to. >>> >>> Q >>> >>> >>> I've been thinking about this extraordinary post and its relationship to our >>> ongoing saga about the TPV, and I fail to see how any rational person could >>> agree to something unknown, except under duress. ?Is it even legal to be >>> required to agree to the incomprehensible? ?Does anyone know how the law >>> works in this area? >>> >>> The GPL license was written by FSF lawyers specifically to be understood by >>> programmers, so it's no surprise that the large majority of people here >>> understand it. Given that Lindens claim that they are issuing a valid GPL >>> license, perhaps one might accept that at face value, and assume that GPLv2 >>> clauses 6, 7, 11 and 12 remain intact and valid. ?Therefore there are no >>> "further restrictions" imposed on SL TPV developers (clause 6), and the "NO >>> WARRANTY" clause (11-12) continues to protect developers from downstream >>> liability, and no "conditions are imposed on you that contradict the >>> conditions of this License" thus making the license valid (clause 7). >>> >>> Given the forgoing, the officially incomprehensible TPV document then no >>> longer matters to SL TPV developers, because their rights and freedoms and >>> lack of liability are determined entirely by the GPL. ?(It could be no other >>> way anyway, since we are told that we cannot understand the TPV.) >>> >>> That leaves only the matter of users of TPVs behaving responsibly when they >>> use TPV clients in SL, with which I'm sure every person on this list is >>> happy to agree. ?(Note that developers become users when they connect to SL, >>> and are bound by the same requirements as users.) ?When users do something >>> bad with a TPV client, or indeed with a Linden client, then naturally they >>> are personally responsible for their actions. >>> >>> In the absence of a TPV document that we can comprehend, perhaps this is the >>> best that TPV developers can do, since agreeing to incomprehensible >>> conditions is not something that any sensible person should consider. >>> >>> >>> Morgaine. >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From Anders at Arnholm.se Sat Apr 3 00:53:39 2010 From: Anders at Arnholm.se (Anders Arnholm) Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 09:53:39 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BB6F403.1010902@Arnholm.se> 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. From latifer at streamgrid.net Sat Apr 3 05:00:42 2010 From: latifer at streamgrid.net (Latif Khalifa) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 14:00:42 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 > From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 05:14:34 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 07:14:34 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Do we have an effective way of compiling the SnowGlobe viewer in Linux with *.sh script? in debian? Jonathan Irvin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/a18084ce/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 3 05:30:29 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 14:30:29 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <4BB6F403.1010902@Arnholm.se> References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> <4BB6F403.1010902@Arnholm.se> Message-ID: <20100403123029.GA2729@alinoe.com> 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 From robin.cornelius at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 05:46:03 2010 From: robin.cornelius at gmail.com (Robin Cornelius) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 13:46:03 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Sat Apr 3 05:53:47 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 14:53:47 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/93168ee7/attachment-0001.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Sat Apr 3 06:49:56 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 06:49:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] PulseAudio requirement in windows question; Technical issue squeezed between legal noise. Message-ID: <838058.1219.qm@web43513.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> 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? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/45bf8f6a/attachment.htm From nicholaz at blueflash.cc Sat Apr 3 06:51:10 2010 From: nicholaz at blueflash.cc (Nicholaz Beresford) Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 15:51:10 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope Message-ID: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> 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. From jessesa at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 07:12:02 2010 From: jessesa at gmail.com (Jesse Barnett) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:12:02 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: <20100403123029.GA2729@alinoe.com> References: <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> <4BB6F403.1010902@Arnholm.se> <20100403123029.GA2729@alinoe.com> Message-ID: 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/8f026a80/attachment.htm From mike.dickson at hp.com Sat Apr 3 07:24:09 2010 From: mike.dickson at hp.com (Michael Dickson) Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 09:24:09 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> <4BB620AB.609@gmail.com> <4BB6F403.1010902@Arnholm.se> <20100403123029.GA2729@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <1270304649.2013.41.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> 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 +0000, 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 From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 08:38:57 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:38:57 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> Message-ID: Thanks for the help all, I will look into this later >.> Jonathan Irvin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/4d54d8ae/attachment.htm From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 08:42:33 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 17:42:33 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] PulseAudio requirement in windows question; Technical issue squeezed between legal noise. In-Reply-To: <838058.1219.qm@web43513.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <838058.1219.qm@web43513.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <20100403174233.0cfee37a.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> 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) From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 08:44:22 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:44:22 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope In-Reply-To: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> References: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/78ace3cb/attachment-0001.htm From marinekelley at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 09:06:17 2010 From: marinekelley at gmail.com (Marine Kelley) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:06:17 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope In-Reply-To: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> References: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/df9fd6e9/attachment.htm From moriz.gupte at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 09:32:35 2010 From: moriz.gupte at gmail.com (Moriz Gupte) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 10:32:35 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope In-Reply-To: References: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: 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 soooo 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 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 > -- 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/a6351c26/attachment.htm From thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 08:09:15 2010 From: thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com (Thickbrick Sleaford) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 18:09:15 +0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can we, open source devs, still support Snowglobe? was: Can we be more productive, please? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201004031809.15396.thickbrick.sleaford@gmail.com> 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 From dzonatas at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 10:43:27 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Sat, 03 Apr 2010 10:43:27 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available Message-ID: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> 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 =) From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 11:18:55 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 13:18:55 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope In-Reply-To: References: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/15b2f1f4/attachment.htm From kck325 at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 20:04:58 2010 From: kck325 at gmail.com (Chandra K Kuchi) Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 23:04:58 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Compressed Object Updates. Message-ID: 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100403/55b21c91/attachment.htm From dmahalko at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 23:49:09 2010 From: dmahalko at gmail.com (Dale Mahalko) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 01:49:09 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? Message-ID: 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 From foxsanyosuke at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 23:53:35 2010 From: foxsanyosuke at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?FoxSan_Yosuk=E9?=) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 08:53:35 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: *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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100404/6bd20d0c/attachment.htm From snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com Sun Apr 4 00:59:18 2010 From: snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com (Maya Remblai) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 01:59:18 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB846D6.7080704@dragonkeepcreations.com> 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 > > From andromedaquonset at gmail.com Sat Apr 3 23:59:32 2010 From: andromedaquonset at gmail.com (Andromeda Quonset) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 00:59:32 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4bb838c9.100bca0a.5685.ffffafe3@mx.google.com> 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 From armin.weatherwax at googlemail.com Sun Apr 4 06:00:49 2010 From: armin.weatherwax at googlemail.com (Armin Weatherwax) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 15:00:49 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV - Nope In-Reply-To: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> References: <4BB747CE.1020903@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: <201004041500.50031.Armin.Weatherwax@gmail.com> Nicholaz Beresford schrieb: > ?In fact I won't even log in again under the new terms > and have canceled my accounts today. +1 See you around in the rest of the Metaverse :) Armin From jor3l at foravatars.com Sun Apr 4 09:07:05 2010 From: jor3l at foravatars.com (Jor3l Boa) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 12:07:05 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] HTTPRequests region limit. Message-ID: Hello there, I need help with llHTTPRequest and a region limit that is giving me 499 http_status, I was testing and seems like the region stops accepting requests when one or more scripts requests over 230 pages. None of those objects reached or passed the 25 requests per 20 seconds limit. Is there a way to confirm this error and know how many time the server needs to accept more requests? Thanks and sorry for my english Jor3l Boa -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100404/f6c7b42f/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 09:40:32 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 02:40:32 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] HTTPRequests region limit. In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB8C100.8030103@gmail.com> llHTTPRequest returns 499 for a whole variety of conditions, actually including gateway timeouts, some DNS errors, ACL denial, request headers or request bodies that are larger than the system is willing to handle, response headers or response bodies that are larger than the system wants to handle, and more. If the HTTP status is passed back from the target server, you get it (except for certain 'unexpected' values, which will automatically cause the transaction to behave as if it failed) - for every other possible condition, you seem to get a 499. On 5/04/2010 2:07 AM, Jor3l Boa wrote: > Hello there, I need help with llHTTPRequest and a region limit that is > giving me 499 http_status, I was testing and seems like the region > stops accepting requests when one or more scripts requests over 230 > pages. None of those objects reached or passed the 25 requests per 20 > seconds limit. Is there a way to confirm this error and know how many > time the server needs to accept more requests? Thanks and sorry for my > english > > Jor3l Boa > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/78fe881e/attachment-0001.htm From gcanaday at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 10:55:35 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 13:55:35 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* into. --GC On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 > From gareth at garethnelson.com Sun Apr 4 13:56:00 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 21:56:00 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Message-ID: The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on disk......) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite connection in a stormy climate for all you know. For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of the box it can be very very buggy. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. > > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* > into. > > --GC > > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From joel.foner at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 14:29:57 2010 From: joel.foner at gmail.com (Joel Foner) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 17:29:57 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Message-ID: This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the default downloads working better? Joel On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a > public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be > hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on > disk......) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite > connection in a stormy climate for all you know. > > For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which > have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or > one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find > who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server > development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of > the box it can be very very buggy. > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of > > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and > > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client > > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. > > > > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very > > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping > > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines > > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The > > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware > > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that > > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more > > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good > > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* > > into. > > > > --GC > > > > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 > > > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100404/4c9db7ba/attachment.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Sun Apr 4 14:46:01 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 22:46:01 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Message-ID: Probably, but there may again be the whole paranoia over "tainting", and some of the instability may be normal developmental issues - stuff that crops up in ongoing development of new features. Note that in my experience, even a description (without an actual patch or any actual code) of how to fix bugs is not accepted - though I have a "colourful" history with opensim. I'm not up to date on how opensim does QA/testing these days (due probably in part to the above mentioned "colourful history"), but i'd imagine that in any project a decent set of tests will catch most issues, if not all. On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to > fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the > default downloads working better? > Joel > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson > wrote: >> >> The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a >> public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be >> hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on >> disk......) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite >> connection in a stormy climate for all you know. >> >> For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which >> have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or >> one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find >> who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server >> development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of >> the box it can be very very buggy. >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of >> > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and >> > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client >> > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. >> > >> > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very >> > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping >> > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines >> > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The >> > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware >> > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that >> > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more >> > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good >> > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* >> > into. >> > >> > --GC >> > >> > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 >> > >> >> >> >> -- >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From robertltux at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 15:01:17 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Sun, 4 Apr 2010 18:01:17 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Message-ID: The "problem" with patches not making it to the core opensim server is that recently they went ripping through the server to enforce a better order to things so you could write a patch that did solve a problem but was useless to the CURRENT code. I think most of the core functions has become stable but right now if you are not looking at the latest SVN/GIT copy then you will miss things. of course there also could be folks that are still running outdated code. -- Robert L Martin From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 16:18:13 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 16:18:13 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1270423093.3028.57.camel@RAGE> Ha. Speaking of colorful, I remember my very first patch ever was a SQL injection fix for OpenSim's grid services (back when OSG when run from PHP scripts) that contained a bunch of cursewords I accidentally left in the comments. On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 22:46 +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: > Probably, but there may again be the whole paranoia over "tainting", > and some of the instability may be normal developmental issues - stuff > that crops up in ongoing development of new features. Note that in my > experience, even a description (without an actual patch or any actual > code) of how to fix bugs is not accepted - though I have a "colourful" > history with opensim. > > I'm not up to date on how opensim does QA/testing these days (due > probably in part to the above mentioned "colourful history"), but i'd > imagine that in any project a decent set of tests will catch most > issues, if not all. > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > > This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to > > fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the > > default downloads working better? > > Joel > > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson > > wrote: > >> > >> The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a > >> public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be > >> hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on > >> disk......) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite > >> connection in a stormy climate for all you know. > >> > >> For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which > >> have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or > >> one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find > >> who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server > >> development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of > >> the box it can be very very buggy. > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > >> > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of > >> > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and > >> > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client > >> > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. > >> > > >> > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very > >> > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping > >> > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines > >> > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The > >> > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware > >> > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that > >> > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more > >> > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good > >> > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* > >> > into. > >> > > >> > --GC > >> > > >> > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > >> > >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > > From gareth at garethnelson.com Sun Apr 4 16:24:25 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 00:24:25 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: <1270423093.3028.57.camel@RAGE> References: <4BB8D297.5090206@gmail.com> <1270423093.3028.57.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: I think I may have been the one to author those PHP scripts - it was a bet made on IRC late at night that I could have a grid up and running (opensim was at the time single regions only) "by breakfast tomorrow" - I did, but it was one messy pile of hacks On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > Ha. > > Speaking of colorful, I remember my very first patch ever was a SQL > injection fix for OpenSim's grid services (back when OSG when run from > PHP scripts) that contained a bunch of cursewords I accidentally left in > the comments. > > On Sun, 2010-04-04 at 22:46 +0100, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> Probably, but there may again be the whole paranoia over "tainting", >> and some of the instability may be normal developmental issues - stuff >> that crops up in ongoing development of new features. Note that in my >> experience, even a description (without an actual patch or any actual >> code) of how to fix bugs is not accepted - though I have a "colourful" >> history with opensim. >> >> I'm not up to date on how opensim does QA/testing these days (due >> probably in part to the above mentioned "colourful history"), but i'd >> imagine that in any project a decent set of tests will catch most >> issues, if not all. >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 10:29 PM, Joel Foner wrote: >> > This could be a not so bright question, but shouldn't all those patches to >> > fix up OpenSim bugs be ending up back in the trunk and end up with the >> > default downloads working better? >> > Joel >> > On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 4:56 PM, Gareth Nelson >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> The thing with OSGrid is that it was meant from the start to be a >> >> public grid where anyone can link up - and so regions there could be >> >> hosted on a 486 with 64mb of RAM (and loads of swap space on >> >> disk......) connected through a VPN over dialup to a satellite >> >> connection in a stormy climate for all you know. >> >> >> >> For anything serious, it's wise to stick to the core regions which >> >> have professional hosting arrangements (hi cari.net - remember me?) or >> >> one of the many commercial grids cropping up. I'd ask around to find >> >> who's hottest right now, but advise you find one with a server >> >> development team that does their own patching of opensim, as out of >> >> the box it can be very very buggy. >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 6:55 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> >> > Mmm. There are many grids, all running different server versions. All of >> >> > the web-related stuff like the concurrency, etc., is all client-side and >> >> > has nothing at all to do with OpenSim. It's web data and your client >> >> > wasn't configured to look at any other web page with that data. >> >> > >> >> > In short, it looks like what you saw was something akin to a very, very >> >> > bad wireless connection. I used to have the same things in SL (ping >> >> > times near 20 sec) before I replaced my wireless card. Physics engines >> >> > don't work when you can't participate in the server frames! The >> >> > particular grid you were on could have been served from crap hardware >> >> > and connection. The upshot is that they could serve it at all, and that >> >> > you could connect... but people (like me) often tend to bite off more >> >> > than they can chew at times. You need a good machine and good >> >> > connectivity in order to serve regions - which LL has invested *oodles* >> >> > into. >> >> > >> >> > --GC >> >> > >> >> > On 04/04/2010 02:49 AM, 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 >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for >> >> everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - >> >> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow >> >> >> >> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. >> >> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> 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 >> > >> >> >> > > > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From dzonatas at gmail.com Sun Apr 4 16:50:00 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2010 16:50:00 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] So you don't like the new TOS and wanna move to the OS grid? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BB925A8.8060000@gmail.com> Client-side physics is a must have in the new features. The first implementation probably would be for avatar clothes, even if the physics stay pretty static or just not-so-fluid. Anything is better then some attachment that tends to eviscerate the avatar. Don't mention client-side physics or any kind of physics prediction on opensim maillist. You get "colorful" remarks by the admins there. They seem not want any kind of physic prediction or client-side physics. It seems like opensim is not an option for such avatar features. I don't mean just linear physics prediction either. I mean even the simple type where if objects are static (easily predictable by a toggle), then download the static object in bulk as a set before one actually arrives at a sim or is logged-in. That way there is no delay upon login itself or when 30+ avatars decide to join a sim all at once (like at world2worlds evets where the scene doesn't change). I mentioned Burning Man event earlier on this list on how people could subscribe to content a week before they actually visit the sim. Anyways... Dale Mahalko wrote: > 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. > From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Sun Apr 4 22:47:10 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 06:47:10 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> Message-ID: 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 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 > < > http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/binary/aHR0cDovL21vbm8uZHpvbnV4Lm5ldC9maWxlL1Nub3dnbG9iZTM3NS9Tbm93Z2xvYmUtaTY4Ni0xLjQtMzc1LnRhci5iejI%3D > > > > Source: http://gitweb.dzonux.net/?p=snowglobe-1.4-375.git > < > http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/source/aHR0cDovL2dpdHdlYi5kem9udXgubmV0Lz9wPXNub3dnbG9iZS0xLjQtMzc1LmdpdA%3D%3D > > > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/cfffd982/attachment-0001.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 05:42:09 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 05:42:09 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> 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 > 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 > > From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Mon Apr 5 10:41:08 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:41:08 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> Message-ID: 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 > dzonatas at 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 >> < >> http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/binary/aHR0cDovL21vbm8uZHpvbnV4Lm5ldC9maWxlL1Nub3dnbG9iZTM3NS9Tbm93Z2xvYmUtaTY4Ni0xLjQtMzc1LnRhci5iejI%3D >> > >> >> Source: http://gitweb.dzonux.net/?p=snowglobe-1.4-375.git >> < >> http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/source/aHR0cDovL2dpdHdlYi5kem9udXgubmV0Lz9wPXNub3dnbG9iZS0xLjQtMzc1LmdpdA%3D%3D >> > >> >> 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 >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/9c44183c/attachment.htm From mike.dickson at hp.com Mon Apr 5 10:57:41 2010 From: mike.dickson at hp.com (Michael Dickson) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:57:41 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> 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 +0000, 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 > > > 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 > > > > > From dzonatas at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 11:21:27 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:21:27 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <4BBA2A27.5030605@gmail.com> That's correct. Michael Dickson wrote: > 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 +0000, Morgaine wrote: > >> > > > > From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Mon Apr 5 11:17:35 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 19:17:35 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by placing a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and then distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of Snowglobe, exempt from being a TPV. If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a name, which is why I asked what that name was. I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients derived from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of bypassing the TPV policy. Perhaps Merov could comment. Morgaine. ================================= On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Michael Dickson wrote: > 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 +0000, 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 > > > > > 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 > > > > < > http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/binary/aHR0cDovL21vbm8uZHpvbnV4Lm5ldC9maWxlL1Nub3dnbG9iZTM3NS9Tbm93Z2xvYmUtaTY4Ni0xLjQtMzc1LnRhci5iejI%3D > > > > > > Source: > > http://gitweb.dzonux.net/?p=snowglobe-1.4-375.git > > > > < > http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/source/aHR0cDovL2dpdHdlYi5kem9udXgubmV0Lz9wPXNub3dnbG9iZS0xLjQtMzc1LmdpdA%3D%3D > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/9426cda2/attachment-0001.htm From nicholaz at blueflash.cc Mon Apr 5 11:46:00 2010 From: nicholaz at blueflash.cc (Nicholaz Beresford) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 20:46:00 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available Message-ID: <4BBA2FE8.9040609@blueflash.cc> +1 You made my day .... > That sounds pretty interesting, Dzonatas. > > What is your viewer called, this TPV derived from Snowglobe > with an extra patch? > > Morgaine. From dzonatas at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 12:30:17 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 12:30:17 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <4BBA3A49.7070209@gmail.com> Please note from the jira: "The purpose of this jira is to help further the process to bring the patch to release quality." At that time, it may be desirable to commit it to Snowglobe. Until then, the patch is offered for community development (not as some conspiracy theory to bypass TPV). If you would like to vote or comment on the patch, please do so here: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375 Morgaine, can you keep this thread to discussion about "SNOW-375". Joe Linden already made a specific request (in AWG chat) in response to TPV clarification, so if you have issues with the TPV then this thread is not the place to fulfill his request. Morgaine wrote: > While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by > placing a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and > then distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of > Snowglobe, exempt from being a TPV. > > If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own > patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. > > So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new > viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a > name, which is why I asked what that name was. > > I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients > derived from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of > bypassing the TPV policy.? Perhaps Merov could comment. > > > Morgaine. > > > > > > ================================= > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Michael Dickson > wrote: > > 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 +0000, 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 > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? > >> > > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > From robertltux at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 12:52:21 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 15:52:21 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] question on settings for the 2.0 built-in browser Message-ID: Some of the noise surrounding 2.0 concerns the lack of adblocking and other privacy enhancing things that can be used with the browser. so if somebody could point me to the answers for the following questions that would be "spiffy" 1 the BiB is htmlkit/safari correct? 2 how could a person install plugins to the BiB? 3 is there a way to use a proxy with the BiB -- Robert L Martin From brent.tubbs at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 13:16:33 2010 From: brent.tubbs at gmail.com (Brent Tubbs) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 13:16:33 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] question on settings for the 2.0 built-in browser In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 1 - I'm not 100% sure but I believe that the built in browser in 2.0 uses QtWebKit. 2 - Plugins would be handled at a higher level than just the webkit engine and there isn't currently a way to create or install them. I've never heard of a generic "webkit" plugin. They're specific to your browser, such as Chrome or Safari. 3 - No idea. On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 12:52 PM, Robert Martin wrote: > Some of the noise surrounding 2.0 concerns the lack of adblocking and > other privacy enhancing things that can be used with the browser. > so if somebody could point me to the answers for the following > questions that would be "spiffy" > > 1 the BiB is htmlkit/safari correct? > 2 how could a person install plugins to the BiB? > 3 is there a way to use a proxy with the BiB > > -- > Robert L Martin > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/662d2903/attachment.htm From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 13:48:02 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 22:48:02 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] question on settings for the 2.0 built-in browser In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100405224802.c6b924d4.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010 15:52:21 -0400 Robert Martin wrote: > 1 the BiB is htmlkit/safari correct? webkit > 2 how could a person install plugins to the BiB? not so sure... but try to create a php file ad hoc and see it inside viewer browser, so u can see where is default plugin directory (never tried) > 3 is there a way to use a proxy with the BiB should inherit from viewer setting... (*should*) From sldev at catznip.com Mon Apr 5 14:22:00 2010 From: sldev at catznip.com (Kitty) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 23:22:00 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Login response request/processing in 1.23 vs Snowglobe / 2.0 Message-ID: <1FC6FF30A74A46A3B306526E0FEDDD19@panther> *waves* What changed in the login response request/processing code from 1.23 -> Snowglobe -> 2.0? I've been trying to figure out why I can connect to the beta grid, but not the main grid half the time with Snowglobe / 2.0, but can effortlessly with 1.23. Alt logs on fine to both grids under any combination of viewer. As best I can determine it's the time between authentication and finish receiving the folder structure etc login response dump that's causing the issues (alt has a much smaller inventory and beta grid has a much higher transfer rate than the main grid)... Main avie, main grid, v2.0: 2010-04-05T20:19:56Z INFO: Poller::Poller: login_to_simulator request sent to https://login.agni.lindenlab.com/cgi-bin/login.cgi 2010-04-05T20:22:17Z INFO: LLXMLRPCTransaction::transferRate: Buffer size: 2235778 B 2010-04-05T20:22:17Z INFO: LLXMLRPCTransaction::transferRate: Transfer rate: 127.272 Kb/s 2010-04-05T20:22:17Z INFO: Poller::poll: login_to_simulator result from https://login.agni.lindenlab.com/cgi-bin/login.cgi: status Complete, errorcode OK ((done)) About 137 seconds, login halts on "Connecting to region" (sim has given up waiting I'd guess) Main avie, main grid, v1.23: 2010-04-05T20:31:33Z INFO: LLUserAuth::authenticate: LLUserAuth::authenticate: uri=https://login.agni.lindenlab.com/cgi-bin/login.cgi 2010-04-05T20:31:33Z INFO: LLStartUp::setStartupState: Startup state changing from STATE_LOGIN_AUTHENTICATE to STATE_LOGIN_NO_DATA_YET 2010-04-05T20:31:41Z INFO: LLStartUp::setStartupState: Startup state changing from STATE_LOGIN_NO_DATA_YET to STATE_LOGIN_DOWNLOADING 2010-04-05T20:31:56Z INFO: LLXMLRPCTransaction::transferRate: Buffer size: 2235778 B 2010-04-05T20:31:56Z INFO: LLXMLRPCTransaction::transferRate: Transfer rate: 106.384 Kb/s 2010-04-05T20:31:56Z INFO: LLUserAuth::authResponse: Processed response: 0 About 23 seconds, normal login. So I'm wondering what changed to that bit of code to cause such a wide difference in download speed? *confuzzled* (Actually on a hunch I peeked at the forums and the above problem would seem to fit quite a few of the stalls at "Connecting to region" that some people are experiencing/reporting. In the cases where there are no logs posted there's a report that logging on with 1.23 will always succeed and when there is a log posted there's the same exceptionally long time for downloading the login response dump) Kitty From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 5 18:28:21 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 18:28:21 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> Message-ID: Hi all, Yes, there were a bunch of missed added files and other issues that actually made the repository not complete, and therefore, not buildable. I did a serie of commits today to fix that. I've been able to build on Mac and Windows at least. Now, I'm still working on fixing the opensrc-build.sh script which is used to produced the binaries. I hope to get build to pass on Parabuild for Mac and Windows shortly. Thanks for your patience. Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/c4b168b9/attachment.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 5 20:51:34 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 20:51:34 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] PulseAudio requirement in windows question; Technical issue squeezed between legal noise. In-Reply-To: <20100403174233.0cfee37a.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> References: <838058.1219.qm@web43513.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <20100403174233.0cfee37a.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > 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 > > This is fixed with svn rev 3304. PulseAudio.cmake was missing from the indra/cmake folder. - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/9d21791c/attachment.htm From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Mon Apr 5 21:38:06 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 05:38:06 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: <4BBA3A49.7070209@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <4BBA3A49.7070209@gmail.com> Message-ID: Dzonatas, I still want to know what your TPV is called, to assist our discussion. You are distributing a TPV made by patching Snowglobe sources with the SNOW-375 patch. The archive you are distributing unpacks as "Snowglobe-i686-1.4.0.0", but I rather doubt that you have permission to be distributing a viewer by that name. Seeing as Lindens have stopped even the word "Life" being used in viewer names, it seems probable that they will stop the word "Snowglobe" being used by others as well. We need to know. But we won't know until Merov or some other Linden tells us. Morgaine. ================================== On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 8:30 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > Please note from the jira: "The purpose of this jira is to help further the > process to bring the patch to release quality." At that time, it may be > desirable to commit it to Snowglobe. Until then, the patch is offered for > community development (not as some conspiracy theory to bypass TPV). > > If you would like to vote or comment on the patch, please do so here: > https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375 > > Morgaine, can you keep this thread to discussion about "SNOW-375". Joe > Linden already made a specific request (in AWG chat) in response to TPV > clarification, so if you have issues with the TPV then this thread is not > the place to fulfill his request. > > Morgaine wrote: > >> While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by placing >> a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and then >> distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of Snowglobe, >> exempt from being a TPV. >> >> If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own >> patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. >> >> So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new >> viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a name, >> which is why I asked what that name was. >> >> I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients derived >> from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of bypassing the TPV >> policy.? Perhaps Merov could comment. >> >> >> Morgaine. >> >> >> >> >> >> ================================= >> >> On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:57 PM, Michael Dickson > mike.dickson at hp.com>> wrote: >> >> 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 +0000, 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 >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? >> >> >> >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 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 >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? >> ?< >> http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/binary/aHR0cDovL21vbm8uZHpvbnV4Lm5ldC9maWxlL1Nub3dnbG9iZTM3NS9Tbm93Z2xvYmUtaTY4Ni0xLjQtMzc1LnRhci5iejI%3D >> > >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?Source: >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? http://gitweb.dzonux.net/?p=snowglobe-1.4-375.git >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? >> ?< >> http://viewerdirectory.secondlife.com/listing/download/137/3/source/aHR0cDovL2dpdHdlYi5kem9udXgubmV0Lz9wPXNub3dnbG9iZS0xLjQtMzc1LmdpdA%3D%3D >> > >> > >> > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?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 >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/bc75d79a/attachment-0001.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 5 21:56:58 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 21:56:58 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: Hi, On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Morgaine wrote: > While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by placing > a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and then > distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of Snowglobe, > exempt from being a TPV. > > If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own > patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. > > So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new > viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a name, > which is why I asked what that name was. > > I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients derived > from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of bypassing the TPV > policy. Perhaps Merov could comment. > > I'll try to answer that case to the best of my understanding: - Commit of SNOW-375 in Snowglobe: This is a big patch and, since we don't have a CLA for Dzonatas on file, it can't be integrated as long as that's not cleared. Note that, to the best of my knowledge, such CLA are asked for contributions to most FLOSS projects. In the meantime, anyone can certainly apply Dzon's patch and build a viewer. As long as you do it for yourself, there's no problem with this. - Distributing Binaries: That indeed creates a TPV and TPV Policy will apply if the viewer plans to connect to the SL grid and be listed in the viewer directory. - Snowglobe Trademark: This is still an on going issue. In https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-153, Robla added the following comment: """ We still plan to protect this logo under trademark law. We haven't announced a specific policy around this, but we're looking at the Fedora and Firefox logos for examples of the tradeoffs. We don't want to have is someone offering a trojan-horse laden viewer under the Snowglobe name bearing this logo, and we want to make sure we've got the legal right to stop that activity. """ I don't have details on where we stand legally on the trademark application right now. In the meantime, using "Snowglobe-XXX" is unlikely to raise issues. Using something really different though is likely safer. Which brings us to... - Easy Packaging of TPV : This is actually the objective of the proposed "BINDIST --- easy way to produce legally distributable binary packages" https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-495 : I've been working on this in the background and plan to get something together shortly. I already identified all applicable patches so I'm not too far off producing a script doing this. Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100405/39e665ed/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Mon Apr 5 22:34:07 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Mon, 05 Apr 2010 22:34:07 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <4BBAC7CF.5060504@gmail.com> Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > > - Commit of SNOW-375 in Snowglobe: This is a big patch and, since we > don't have a CLA for Dzonatas on file, it can't be integrated as long > as that's not cleared. Note that, to the best of my knowledge, such > CLA are asked for contributions to most FLOSS projects. In the > meantime,?anyone can certainly apply Dzon's patch and build a viewer. > As long as you do it for yourself, there's no problem with this. When SNOW-375 reaches more of a 1.0 version of the patch (and probably updated for SG2.0), then we'll work on the C.A. Until then, I would like to see the patch standardized more before others start to rely on such REST resources -- less hassle. I've collected wide-range various input, so far. From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Mon Apr 5 22:26:32 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 06:26:32 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: Thanks Merov! That cleared up a lot of confusion. Could you please check the word "*and*" in your following paragraph? On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:56 AM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > > - Distributing Binaries: That indeed creates a TPV and TPV Policy will > apply if the viewer plans to connect to the SL grid *and* be listed in the > viewer directory. > > The TPV doc says that it applies to all third party clients that connect to SL, whether or not they are listed in the TPV directory. Your word "*and*" (if used as programmers use it) would mean that both conditions need to be true, which is probably not what you meant. If both conditions need to be true then any viewer not listed in the directory would be exempt from the TPV, which I believe was not your intention. (The word "plan" is also not used in the TPV.) A small clarification of that would be very useful, since it would have a major impact. Morgaine. ================================= On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:56 AM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Morgaine wrote: > >> While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by placing >> a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and then >> distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of Snowglobe, >> exempt from being a TPV. >> >> If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own >> patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. >> >> So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new >> viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a name, >> which is why I asked what that name was. >> >> I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients derived >> from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of bypassing the TPV >> policy. Perhaps Merov could comment. >> >> > I'll try to answer that case to the best of my understanding: > > - Commit of SNOW-375 in Snowglobe: This is a big patch and, since we don't > have a CLA for Dzonatas on file, it can't be integrated as long as that's > not cleared. Note that, to the best of my knowledge, such CLA are asked for > contributions to most FLOSS projects. In the meantime, anyone can certainly > apply Dzon's patch and build a viewer. As long as you do it for yourself, > there's no problem with this. > > - Distributing Binaries: That indeed creates a TPV and TPV Policy will > apply if the viewer plans to connect to the SL grid and be listed in the > viewer directory. > > - Snowglobe Trademark: This is still an on going issue. In > https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-153, Robla added the following > comment: > """ > We still plan to protect this logo under trademark law. We haven't > announced a specific policy around this, but we're looking at the Fedora and > Firefox logos for examples of the tradeoffs. We don't want to have is > someone offering a trojan-horse laden viewer under the Snowglobe name > bearing this logo, and we want to make sure we've got the legal right to > stop that activity. > """ > I don't have details on where we stand legally on the trademark application > right now. In the meantime, using "Snowglobe-XXX" is unlikely to raise > issues. Using something really different though is likely safer. Which > brings us to... > > - Easy Packaging of TPV : This is actually the objective of the proposed > "BINDIST --- easy way to produce legally distributable binary packages" > https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-495 : I've been working on this in > the background and plan to get something together shortly. I already > identified all applicable patches so I'm not too far off producing a script > doing this. > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/e1e50ef1/attachment.htm From jbhancroft at gmail.com Tue Apr 6 05:46:16 2010 From: jbhancroft at gmail.com (JB Hancroft) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 08:46:16 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: Thanks, Merov. Using Dzonatas' SNOW-375 will be a great way to extend the viewer capabilities. Progress on SNOW-495 is good news - thank you! Is that against the 1.4 codebase, or Snow V2? Thanks, - JB On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut < merov at lindenlab.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Morgaine wrote: > >> While that may be his intention, you can't make a new Snowglobe by placing >> a patch in Jira, applying the patch to Snowglobe sources, and then >> distributing the resulting viewer as if it were a new version of Snowglobe, >> exempt from being a TPV. >> >> If that were possible then everyone would do likewise with their own >> patches in order not to be caught by the TPV policy. >> >> So until SNOW-375 is committed into Snowglobe, Dzon is releasing a new >> viewer that is not Snowglobe, and it's clearly a TPV so it needs a name, >> which is why I asked what that name was. >> >> I expect that Linden Lab would not take kindly to such TPV clients derived >> from Snowglobe being called "Snowglobe-XXX" as a way of bypassing the TPV >> policy. Perhaps Merov could comment. >> >> > I'll try to answer that case to the best of my understanding: > > - Commit of SNOW-375 in Snowglobe: This is a big patch and, since we don't > have a CLA for Dzonatas on file, it can't be integrated as long as that's > not cleared. Note that, to the best of my knowledge, such CLA are asked for > contributions to most FLOSS projects. In the meantime, anyone can certainly > apply Dzon's patch and build a viewer. As long as you do it for yourself, > there's no problem with this. > > - Distributing Binaries: That indeed creates a TPV and TPV Policy will > apply if the viewer plans to connect to the SL grid and be listed in the > viewer directory. > > - Snowglobe Trademark: This is still an on going issue. In > https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-153, Robla added the following > comment: > """ > We still plan to protect this logo under trademark law. We haven't > announced a specific policy around this, but we're looking at the Fedora and > Firefox logos for examples of the tradeoffs. We don't want to have is > someone offering a trojan-horse laden viewer under the Snowglobe name > bearing this logo, and we want to make sure we've got the legal right to > stop that activity. > """ > I don't have details on where we stand legally on the trademark application > right now. In the meantime, using "Snowglobe-XXX" is unlikely to raise > issues. Using something really different though is likely safer. Which > brings us to... > > - Easy Packaging of TPV : This is actually the objective of the proposed > "BINDIST --- easy way to produce legally distributable binary packages" > https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-495 : I've been working on this in > the background and plan to get something together shortly. I already > identified all applicable patches so I'm not too far off producing a script > doing this. > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/60816bc3/attachment-0001.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Tue Apr 6 10:05:00 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 10:05:00 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SNOW-375 Binary Package Available In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: Hi, On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 5:46 AM, JB Hancroft wrote: > Progress on SNOW-495 is good news - thank you! Is that against the 1.4 > codebase, or Snow V2? > Snowglobe 2.0. I don't think there's much value to do that for 1.4 though I'm pretty sure the branding script will be easily adaptable to that code base. Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/a3ca0688/attachment.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Tue Apr 6 11:42:48 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:42:48 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> This may well be caused by my hacks trying to get VC90 to build. However, it shows up in secondlife-bin build which is not where I have been working. secondlife-bin has built before w/o error under VC90. http://pastebin.com/JK6fNvkz ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/0264c350/attachment.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Tue Apr 6 14:31:58 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 14:31:58 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) In-Reply-To: <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <531571.83983.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> I found the missing header in windows but, the cursor files below are to be found, 1>llstartup.cpp 1>Compiling resources... 1>Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Resource Compiler Version 6.1.6723.1 1>Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(122) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolopen.cur 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(123) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolsit.cur 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(124) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolbuy.cur 1>Build log was saved at "file://c:\SL_SVN\trunk\indra\build-VC90\newview\secondlife-bin.dir\RelWithDebInfo\BuildLog.htm" 1>secondlife-bin - 3 error(s), 0 warning(s) ========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 62 up-to-date, 0 skipped ========== ________________________________ From: Nicky Perian To: Philippe (Merov) Bossut Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Tue, April 6, 2010 1:42:48 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) This may well be caused by my hacks trying to get VC90 to build. However, it shows up in secondlife-bin build which is not where I have been working. secondlife-bin has built before w/o error under VC90. http://pastebin.com/JK6fNvkz ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100406/70070d44/attachment.htm From gcanaday at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 08:03:14 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 11:03:14 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? --GC From moriz.gupte at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 08:14:17 2010 From: moriz.gupte at gmail.com (Moriz Gupte) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 09:14:17 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client side for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc... but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with. So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at the same site. R On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday wrote: > > > Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the > rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? > > --GC > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100407/2ed44582/attachment.htm From gcanaday at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 12:48:52 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 15:48:52 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <4BB9DAA1.1070801@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I think it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics engines atm and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions with soft bodies deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a little tricky when you split them. --GC On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote: > I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client > side for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc... > but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body > dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with. > So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at > the same site. > R > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday > wrote: > > > > Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the > rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? > > --GC > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > > > -- > 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' > Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State > University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 > More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100407/8576fd90/attachment.htm From jacek.antonelli at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 16:39:46 2010 From: jacek.antonelli at gmail.com (Jacek Antonelli) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 18:39:46 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> Message-ID: Personally, I would keep soft body effects as purely client-side eye candy, without any impact on the world, like flexi prims and particles are today. Sending the deformation data from the server to the client, or vice versa, would be very bandwidth intensive, and a huge headache to keep in sync. And some users would need to disable the feature altogether, because it would also be costly to process the effect. - Jacek On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a > collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics > engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I think > it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics engines atm > and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions with soft bodies > deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a little tricky when you > split them. > > --GC > > On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote: > > I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client side > for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc... > but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body > dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with. > So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at the > same site. > R > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> >> >> Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the >> rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? >> >> --GC >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > > > -- > 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' > Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State > University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 > More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From lear.cale at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 17:25:36 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:25:36 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> Message-ID: I agree with Jacek -- at least for 1st cut, make it so that flexi hair doesn't pierce anyone's body, but no effect on collisions. This would keep it simple and fix the biggest issue for most people. On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Jacek Antonelli wrote: > Personally, I would keep soft body effects as purely client-side eye > candy, without any impact on the world, like flexi prims and particles > are today. Sending the deformation data from the server to the client, > or vice versa, would be very bandwidth intensive, and a huge headache > to keep in sync. And some users would need to disable the feature > altogether, because it would also be costly to process the effect. > > - Jacek > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a >> collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics >> engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I think >> it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics engines atm >> and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions with soft bodies >> deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a little tricky when you >> split them. >> >> --GC >> >> On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote: >> >> I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client side >> for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc... >> but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body >> dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with. >> So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at the >> same site. >> R >> >> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday wrote: >>> >>> >>> Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the >>> rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? >>> >>> --GC >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >> >> >> >> -- >> 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' >> Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State >> University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 >> More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > From gcanaday at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 17:25:50 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 20:25:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <1270490261.2220.12.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> I'm only playing with the idea. Soft-body would have to be client-side only. if you think your SL is laggy NOW, imagine if it were also sending the vertex data back and forth to the sim. That would make SL unusable. It's a fun idea, though... I can imagine fields of waving grass, rubber couches and trampolines, and well as a little bit o' jiggle when ya walk, ya know, jes for fun :) Prim clothes and flexi hair that actually drapes, etc. I'm only dreaming it up. The client would have to anticipate collisions a few frames before they occur to keep it more realistic, and then the server would have a few server frames to report that the collision actually happened like it already does. No server changes in mind. It would require that changes be made to the avatar meshes. --GC On 04/07/2010 07:39 PM, Jacek Antonelli wrote: > Personally, I would keep soft body effects as purely client-side eye > candy, without any impact on the world, like flexi prims and particles > are today. Sending the deformation data from the server to the client, > or vice versa, would be very bandwidth intensive, and a huge headache > to keep in sync. And some users would need to disable the feature > altogether, because it would also be costly to process the effect. > > - Jacek > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 2:48 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > >> I came to the same conclusion, with the exception that a lookahead for a >> collision would be helpful in the client. If they use the same physics >> engine and the client does no more than implement a collision check, I think >> it could be a good thing. I'm looking at several free physics engines atm >> and thought I would clear my thinking up some. Collisions with soft bodies >> deform the collision mesh itself so yeah it gets a little tricky when you >> split them. >> >> --GC >> >> On 04/07/2010 11:14 AM, Moriz Gupte wrote: >> >> I feel you are right. Makes more sense to have it implemented client side >> for many soft body dynamic behaviors... eg cloth, hair etc... >> but I think in areas where rigid body behaviors impact local soft body >> dynamics, there will be lots of timing and synch problems to deal with. >> So there's where I think that perhaps all physics need to be done at the >> same site. >> R >> >> On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 9:03 AM, Glen Canaday wrote: >> >>> >>> Soft body physics are best implemented in a local viewer, leaving the >>> rigid-body collision detection to the server, am I right in this? >>> >>> --GC >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 >>> >> >> >> -- >> 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' >> Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State >> University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 >> More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> From robertltux at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 17:49:24 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 20:49:24 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> Message-ID: What may be a stopgap would be to have different "levels" of collision detection so if you have say 4 levels of detection then do the lowest level on the server and work with the other 3 levels client side (have a skirt bounce back from the legs but leave exactly which way it bounces on clientside) -- Robert L Martin From dzonatas at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 18:22:58 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Wed, 07 Apr 2010 18:22:58 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> Message-ID: <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> I just checked out revision 3313 from https://svn.secondlife.com/svn/linden/projects/2010/snowglobe/trunk After plain ./develop.py with no options , i got an error $ make [ 0%] Built target cmake [ 0%] Built target llaudio [ 3%] Built target stage_third_party_libs [ 3%] Built target llcommon_tests [ 3%] Building CXX object llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o In file included from /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/coroutine.hpp:44, from /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.h:39, from /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.cpp:39: /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp:59: error: declaration of 'typedef class boost::coroutines::detail::context_base boost::coroutines::detail::coroutine_impl::context_base' /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/context_base.hpp:55: error: changes meaning of 'context_base' from 'class boost::coroutines::detail::context_base' make[2]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/all] Error 2 make: *** [all] Error 2 Haven't fully tracked this one down, so didn't file a jira. Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > Hi all, > > Yes, there were a bunch of missed added files and other issues that > actually made the repository not complete, and therefore, not > buildable. I did a serie of commits today to fix that. I've been able > to build on Mac and Windows at least. > > Now, I'm still working on fixing the opensrc-build.sh script which is > used to produced the binaries. I hope to get build to pass on > Parabuild for Mac and Windows shortly. > > Thanks for your patience. > > 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 From nickyperian at yahoo.com Wed Apr 7 19:46:54 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Wed, 7 Apr 2010 19:46:54 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) Message-ID: <642824.60589.qm@web43515.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Ding!!! Maybe these files are in the Artwork, that I had not updated for some time. Updated Artwork and Libraries and got a build complete of secondlife-bin.exe using vc90. ________________________________ From: Nicky Perian To: Nicky Perian ; Philippe (Merov) Bossut Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Tue, April 6, 2010 4:31:58 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) I found the missing header in windows but, the cursor files below are to be found, 1>llstartup.cpp 1>Compiling resources... 1>Microsoft (R) Windows (R) Resource Compiler Version 6.1.6723.1 1>Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(122) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolopen.cur 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(123) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolsit.cur 1>..\..\newview\res\viewerRes.rc(124) : error RC2135 : file not found: toolbuy.cur 1>Build log was saved at "file://c:\SL_SVN\trunk\indra\build-VC90\newview\secondlife-bin.dir\RelWithDebInfo\BuildLog.htm" 1>secondlife-bin - 3 error(s), 0 warning(s) ========== Build: 0 succeeded, 1 failed, 62 up-to-date, 0 skipped ========== ________________________________ From: Nicky Perian To: Philippe (Merov) Bossut Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Tue, April 6, 2010 1:42:48 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Build failure in resource complier using VC++ Express 2008 (VC90) This may well be caused by my hacks trying to get VC90 to build. However, it shows up in secondlife-bin build which is not where I have been working. secondlife-bin has built before w/o error under VC90. http://pastebin.com/JK6fNvkz ________________________________ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100407/422639d3/attachment-0001.htm From gcanaday at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 22:08:32 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 01:08:32 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Another crazy idea... what list for this one? In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBD64D0.2020500@gmail.com> What would the appropriate list for this be? I'm pretty sure it's not this one, Anyone know of a flash desktop exporter? For two-way web interaction with your own desktop? Killer app for shared media... using your own computer! ;) I've thought of perhaps a web-based desktop environment to render / export my X display to my web server with which I can then interact and work while logged into SL. Perhaps a buffer program that captures the X drawables and hands them to a flash app for web-based display. Imagine remote server admin possibilities, etc... not having to minimize SL to check job progress; share the desktop as if you were in the same room. Devs could literally be looking at a desktop thousands of miles away like gotomeeting, watching the same compile messages fly by, using the same primary display from inworld without the hassle of the software incompatibilities that gotomeeting and ultravnc have beyond running the exporter itself. Export a second desktop or stretch it across two shared-media prims like dual monitor setups in RL. The virtual workplace redefined. Office in your underwear, 'cept your av is wearing the ugly, ill-fitting business suit your boss likes. --GC From tateru.nino at gmail.com Wed Apr 7 22:39:27 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 15:39:27 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Another crazy idea... what list for this one? In-Reply-To: <4BBD64D0.2020500@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> <4BBD64D0.2020500@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBD6C0F.5030608@gmail.com> Something like FlashVNC? On 8/04/2010 3:08 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > What would the appropriate list for this be? I'm pretty sure it's not > this one, > > Anyone know of a flash desktop exporter? For two-way web interaction > with your own desktop? Killer app for shared media... using your own > computer! ;) > > I've thought of perhaps a web-based desktop environment to render / > export my X display to my web server with which I can then interact and > work while logged into SL. Perhaps a buffer program that captures the X > drawables and hands them to a flash app for web-based display. Imagine > remote server admin possibilities, etc... not having to minimize SL to > check job progress; share the desktop as if you were in the same room. > Devs could literally be looking at a desktop thousands of miles away > like gotomeeting, watching the same compile messages fly by, using the > same primary display from inworld without the hassle of the software > incompatibilities that gotomeeting and ultravnc have beyond running the > exporter itself. Export a second desktop or stretch it across two > shared-media prims like dual monitor setups in RL. The virtual workplace > redefined. Office in your underwear, 'cept your av is wearing the ugly, > ill-fitting business suit your boss likes. > > --GC > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From makosoft at googlemail.com Thu Apr 8 02:41:10 2010 From: makosoft at googlemail.com (Aidan Thornton) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:41:10 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to > convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. Yep - people seem to end up writing their own simulator from scratch instead as a result. I know that I did[1], and I recall that both you and John Hurliman had your own projects too (litesim and Simian respectively). [1] http://www.makomk.com/gitweb/?p=cajeput.git;a=summary From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 8 02:54:50 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:54:50 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Can you legally agree to incomprehensible conditions In-Reply-To: References: <001201cad1ad$103f6d20$6401a8c0@hp> <20100402023421.GC5348@alinoe.com> <4BB56B19.20805@dragonkeepcreations.com> <20100402124015.GA26855@alinoe.com> Message-ID: It's doable if you never merge upstream patches in, but even then you've got quite a mess to clean up. I did the fork thing for a while and found it was very tricky to clean up, my own from-scratch simulator (litesim.py) was way way more stable but lagged behind massively with features. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Aidan Thornton wrote: > On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> It's a lot of work to maintain, trust me - anyway, it'd be better to >> convince the opensim team to allow viewer developers in. > > Yep - people seem to end up writing their own simulator from scratch > instead as a result. I know that I did[1], and I recall that both you > and John Hurliman had your own projects too (litesim and Simian > respectively). > > [1] http://www.makomk.com/gitweb/?p=cajeput.git;a=summary > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Thu Apr 8 04:16:35 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 13:16:35 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] VNC plugin (was: Another crazy idea... what list for this one?) In-Reply-To: <4BBD64D0.2020500@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> <4BBD64D0.2020500@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBDBB13.2020308@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/08/2010 07:08 AM, Glen Canaday wrote: > What would the appropriate list for this be? I'm pretty sure it's not > this one, > MediaAPI , probably. Though, before looking just a moment ago, I wasn't even aware that list existed. /me goes read the (still small) archive. > Anyone know of a flash desktop exporter? For two-way web interaction > with your own desktop? Killer app for shared media... using your own > computer! ;) > Why Flash? It looks like Aimee's plugin does just what you want. Now, if she'd find some time to publish it ... :-) cheers Boroondas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100408/4a89b1a0/attachment.htm From lynx at lindenlab.com Thu Apr 8 07:12:19 2010 From: lynx at lindenlab.com (Lynx Linden) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 15:12:19 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> Message-ID: This is a problem with the packaged boost headers - they don't seem to compile on Linux under gcc 4.x. I've attached a patch for the libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/{coroutine_impl.hpp,posix_utility.hpp} files that should get you going in the short term. Ultimately though we should build a new version of the boost package with that patch applied to it. Filing a JIRA to track this would be great. Cheers, Lynx. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > I just checked out revision 3313 from > https://svn.secondlife.com/svn/linden/projects/2010/snowglobe/trunk > > After plain ?./develop.py with no options , i got an error > > $ make > [ ?0%] Built target cmake > [ ?0%] Built target llaudio > [ ?3%] Built target stage_third_party_libs > [ ?3%] Built target llcommon_tests > [ ?3%] Building CXX object llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o > In file included from > /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/coroutine.hpp:44, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? from > /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.h:39, > ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? from > /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.cpp:39: > /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp:59: > error: declaration of 'typedef class > boost::coroutines::detail::context_base > boost::coroutines::detail::coroutine_impl ContextImpl>::context_base' > /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/context_base.hpp:55: > error: changes meaning of 'context_base' from 'class > boost::coroutines::detail::context_base' > make[2]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o] Error 1 > make[1]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/all] Error 2 > make: *** [all] Error 2 > > > Haven't fully tracked this one down, so didn't file a jira. > > > Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Yes, there were a bunch of missed added files and other issues that >> actually made the repository not complete, and therefore, not >> buildable. I did a serie of commits today to fix that. I've been able >> to build on Mac and Windows at least. >> >> Now, I'm still working on fixing the opensrc-build.sh script which is >> used to produced the binaries. I hope to get build to pass on >> Parabuild for Mac and Windows shortly. >> >> Thanks for your patience. >> >> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- diff -u -r old/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp new/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp --- old/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp 2009-10-20 17:10:02.000000000 +0100 +++ new/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp 2009-10-20 19:22:11.000000000 +0100 @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ typedef ContextImpl context_impl; typedef CoroutineType coroutine_type; typedef coroutine_impl type; - typedef context_base context_base; + typedef context_base context_base_type; typedef typename coroutine_type::arg_slot_type arg_slot_type; typedef typename coroutine_type::result_type result_type; typedef typename coroutine_type::result_slot_type result_slot_type; @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ template coroutine_impl(DerivedType * this_, std::ptrdiff_t stack_size) : - context_base(*this_, stack_size), + context_base_type(*this_, stack_size), m_arg(0), m_result(0){} diff -u -r old/boost/coroutine/detail/posix_utility.hpp new/boost/coroutine/detail/posix_utility.hpp --- old/boost/coroutine/detail/posix_utility.hpp 2009-04-24 21:30:44.000000000 +0100 +++ new/boost/coroutine/detail/posix_utility.hpp 2009-10-20 19:21:27.000000000 +0100 @@ -39,6 +39,7 @@ #include #include #include +#include #include #if defined(_POSIX_MAPPED_FILES) && _POSIX_MAPPED_FILES > 0 #include From robertltux at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 07:18:46 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 10:18:46 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> Message-ID: As a sidebar to this is the documents on how to compile the viewer actually current?? If somebody would be willing to walk me through this i could help find out what is correct (note i have Mandriva 2010) -- Robert L Martin From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 08:05:01 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 08:05:01 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBDF09D.9060109@gmail.com> Just to note: there is a related jira here about such patch: http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-505 SNOW-505 is about standalone build instead of the ll downloaded libs. Same error, however. Lynx Linden wrote: > This is a problem with the packaged boost headers - they don't seem to > compile on Linux under gcc 4.x. I've attached a patch for the > libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/{coroutine_impl.hpp,posix_utility.hpp} > files that should get you going in the short term. > > Ultimately though we should build a new version of the boost package > with that patch applied to it. Filing a JIRA to track this would be > great. > > Cheers, > > Lynx. > > > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 2:22 AM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> I just checked out revision 3313 from >> https://svn.secondlife.com/svn/linden/projects/2010/snowglobe/trunk >> >> After plain ?./develop.py with no options , i got an error >> >> $ make >> [ ?0%] Built target cmake >> [ ?0%] Built target llaudio >> [ ?3%] Built target stage_third_party_libs >> [ ?3%] Built target llcommon_tests >> [ ?3%] Building CXX object llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o >> In file included from >> /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/coroutine.hpp:44, >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? from >> /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.h:39, >> ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? from >> /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/llcommon/llcoros.cpp:39: >> /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/coroutine_impl.hpp:59: >> error: declaration of 'typedef class >> boost::coroutines::detail::context_base >> boost::coroutines::detail::coroutine_impl> ContextImpl>::context_base' >> /home/dzonatas/workspace/snowglobe.2.0/indra/../libraries/include/boost/coroutine/detail/context_base.hpp:55: >> error: changes meaning of 'context_base' from 'class >> boost::coroutines::detail::context_base' >> make[2]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/llcoros.o] Error 1 >> make[1]: *** [llcommon/CMakeFiles/llcommon.dir/all] Error 2 >> make: *** [all] Error 2 >> >> >> Haven't fully tracked this one down, so didn't file a jira. >> >> >> Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Yes, there were a bunch of missed added files and other issues that >>> actually made the repository not complete, and therefore, not >>> buildable. I did a serie of commits today to fix that. I've been able >>> to build on Mac and Windows at least. >>> >>> Now, I'm still working on fixing the opensrc-build.sh script which is >>> used to produced the binaries. I hope to get build to pass on >>> Parabuild for Mac and Windows shortly. >>> >>> Thanks for your patience. >>> >>> 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 >> >> From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 10:27:20 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 10:27:20 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBE11F8.9070503@gmail.com> I got it to compile to the secondlife-bin link stage, but then I got a link error: /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: undefined reference to `uuid_generate at UUID_1.0' /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: undefined reference to `uuid_unparse_lower at UUID_1.0' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status It does try to link against libuuid, with this link order: -lndofdev -lXinerama -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL -latk-1.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lXinerama -lglib-2.0 -lgmodule-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lgtk-x11-2.0 -lpango-1.0 -lpangoft2-1.0 -lpangox-1.0 -lpangoxft-1.0 -lxmlrpc-epi -lELFIO ../viewer_components/login/liblllogin.a ../llmessage/libllmessage.a -lcurl -lcares -lssl -lcrypto -lxmlrpc-epi ../llrender/libllrender.a ../llimage/libllimage.a ../llimagej2coj/libllimagej2coj.a -lopenjpeg -ljpeg -lpng12 -lfreetype -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL ../llxml/libllxml.a ../llvfs/libllvfs.a ../llmath/libllmath.a ../llcommon/libllcommon.so -laprutil-1 -ldb-4.2 -luuid -ldb-4.2 -luuid -lrt -lapr-1 -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lz -lexpat This might be a recent change in compiler which forces one to use GCC 4.1... and I didn't see this one in jira. I'll work this issue out more to see if it is merely a GCC4.4/GCC4.1 difference. From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Thu Apr 8 10:37:45 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 19:37:45 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <4BBE11F8.9070503@gmail.com> References: <4BBE11F8.9070503@gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004081937.45554.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> I'm having the same problem on opensuse 11.2. until recently it built fine... after some change introduced a script which replaces the prebuilt libs with the systemwide installed ones, it stopped building with exactly that error. why do i even have to have the build script download the prebuilt libs when they dont get used? bye, LC Am Donnerstag 08 April 2010 schrieb Dzonatas Sol: > I got it to compile to the secondlife-bin link stage, but then I > got a link error: > > /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: > undefined reference to `uuid_generate at UUID_1.0' > /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: > undefined reference to `uuid_unparse_lower at UUID_1.0' > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > > It does try to link against libuuid, with this link order: > > -lndofdev -lXinerama -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt > -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lGLU -lGL -lSM > -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL > -latk-1.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lXinerama -lglib-2.0 > -lgmodule-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lgtk-x11-2.0 > -lpango-1.0 -lpangoft2-1.0 -lpangox-1.0 -lpangoxft-1.0 > -lxmlrpc-epi -lELFIO > ../viewer_components/login/liblllogin.a ../llmessage/libllmessage.a > -lcurl -lcares -lssl -lcrypto -lxmlrpc-epi > ../llrender/libllrender.a ../llimage/libllimage.a > ../llimagej2coj/libllimagej2coj.a -lopenjpeg -ljpeg -lpng12 > -lfreetype -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL > ../llxml/libllxml.a ../llvfs/libllvfs.a ../llmath/libllmath.a > ../llcommon/libllcommon.so -laprutil-1 -ldb-4.2 -luuid -ldb-4.2 > -luuid -lrt -lapr-1 -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt > -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lz -lexpat > > > This might be a recent change in compiler which forces one to use > GCC 4.1... and I didn't see this one in jira. > > I'll work this issue out more to see if it is merely a > GCC4.4/GCC4.1 difference. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 12:48:57 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 12:48:57 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: References: <4BB73A5B.8040609@boroon.dasgupta.ch> <4BBD2FF2.8020501@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBE3329.2000604@gmail.com> Here is my notes on how to compile with schroot, so you can make an environment specifically for this compilation: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Dzonatas_Sol/Snowglobe Robert Martin wrote: > As a sidebar to this is the documents on how to compile the viewer > actually current?? > If somebody would be willing to walk me through this i could help find > out what is correct > (note i have Mandriva 2010) > > > From joe at lindenlab.com Thu Apr 8 13:24:57 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) Message-ID: Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think would benefit from open dialog around the subject. I hope to see many of you there next week. -- Joe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100408/c549d22a/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 14:40:53 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 14:40:53 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <201004081937.45554.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <4BBE11F8.9070503@gmail.com> <201004081937.45554.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <4BBE4D65.2060009@gmail.com> I just tried it again, so now I can confirm there is no difference between a compilation with G++-4.1 or G++-4.4 in relation to this error. Linking CXX executable secondlife-bin /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.1.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: undefined reference to `uuid_generate at UUID_1.0' /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.1.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: undefined reference to `uuid_unparse_lower at UUID_1.0' collect2: ld returned 1 exit status Maybe something special about libSM that it needs a specific version of libuuid, or maybe as Lance suggested, it doesn't use the the LL supplied versus the system version. Lance Corrimal wrote: > I'm having the same problem on opensuse 11.2. > until recently it built fine... after some change introduced a script > which replaces the prebuilt libs with the systemwide installed ones, > it stopped building with exactly that error. > > why do i even have to have the build script download the prebuilt libs > when they dont get used? > > > bye, > LC > > > Am Donnerstag 08 April 2010 schrieb Dzonatas Sol: > >> I got it to compile to the secondlife-bin link stage, but then I >> got a link error: >> >> /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: >> undefined reference to `uuid_generate at UUID_1.0' >> /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/../../../../lib/libSM.so: >> undefined reference to `uuid_unparse_lower at UUID_1.0' >> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status >> >> It does try to link against libuuid, with this link order: >> >> -lndofdev -lXinerama -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt >> -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lgobject-2.0 -lglib-2.0 -lGLU -lGL -lSM >> -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL >> -latk-1.0 -lgdk-x11-2.0 -lgdk_pixbuf-2.0 -lXinerama -lglib-2.0 >> -lgmodule-2.0 -lgobject-2.0 -lgthread-2.0 -lgtk-x11-2.0 >> -lpango-1.0 -lpangoft2-1.0 -lpangox-1.0 -lpangoxft-1.0 >> -lxmlrpc-epi -lELFIO >> ../viewer_components/login/liblllogin.a ../llmessage/libllmessage.a >> -lcurl -lcares -lssl -lcrypto -lxmlrpc-epi >> ../llrender/libllrender.a ../llimage/libllimage.a >> ../llimagej2coj/libllimagej2coj.a -lopenjpeg -ljpeg -lpng12 >> -lfreetype -lGLU -lGL -lSM -lICE -lX11 -lXext -lSDL >> ../llxml/libllxml.a ../llvfs/libllvfs.a ../llmath/libllmath.a >> ../llcommon/libllcommon.so -laprutil-1 -ldb-4.2 -luuid -ldb-4.2 >> -luuid -lrt -lapr-1 -lboost_program_options-gcc41-mt >> -lboost_regex-gcc41-mt -lz -lexpat >> >> >> This might be a recent change in compiler which forces one to use >> GCC 4.1... and I didn't see this one in jira. >> >> I'll work this issue out more to see if it is merely a >> GCC4.4/GCC4.1 difference. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > > From johnniecarling at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 14:38:09 2010 From: johnniecarling at gmail.com (Johnnie Carling) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 17:38:09 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <4BBE4D65.2060009@gmail.com> References: <201004081937.45554.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BBE4D65.2060009@gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004081738.09911.johnniecarling@gmail.com> On 04/08/10 5:40:53 pm, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > Maybe something special about libSM that it needs a specific version of > libuuid, or maybe as Lance suggested, it doesn't use the the LL supplied > versus the system version. FYI. I ran into this last fall. Using the system libuuid (libuuid.so.1.3.0 in debian sid) worked for me. -- Johnnie Carling From jdog at windwardsolutions.com Thu Apr 8 15:00:18 2010 From: jdog at windwardsolutions.com (Jeff Eastman) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 15:00:18 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] [Fwd: Re: Another crazy idea... what list for this one?] Message-ID: <4BBE51F2.7090109@windwardsolutions.com> Forgot to reply-all. I'm used to lists that reply-to-list as default. -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Jeff Eastman Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Another crazy idea... what list for this one? Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 11:06:25 -0700 Size: 2936 Url: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100408/71285ab1/attachment.eml From dmahalko at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 16:04:35 2010 From: dmahalko at gmail.com (Dale Mahalko) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 18:04:35 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> Message-ID: Can you point to anything in 3D animation that already does this sort of thing? I don't think it exists. The idea sounds reminiscent of an idea I posted on this list a few years ago, wrapping a sculptie mesh around a collection of prims and "deflating" the mesh until its vertices form-fit the prims within, sort of like vacuum-forming with plastic, to quickly make a multiprim object into a single sculptie. , Sending raw soft-mesh vertex points to the client to accurately show the soft mesh shape would likely be far too slow. A simple mesh can contain a few hundred points, each with X/Y/Z coordinates, and these must all be adjusted for each new "frame" of the 3D renderer. You would probably have to simplify and generalize the soft body modeling to make it fast enough for a slow network connection, and leave the actual modeling up to the local computer. Define general static forces that pin the mesh around its edge and on its surface, such as the flattening buttons like on chair cushions. To "inflate" the mesh into a bun or balloon, assign a general direction of billow. And if desired, also adjust the elasticity of the rays linking vertices together to tighten up or loosen the overall shape, such as along seams on pillows.. To deform the mesh the server only sends a force and a 3D impression shape to the client, such as a sphere X meters in diameter pressing into the mesh surface with Y newtons of force. The client then uses that simple data in combination with the defined static forces to dynamically deform the soft mesh vertices, such as representing your avatar's feet pushing down on surface of a trampoline. Just don't ask me to program that. :-) - Dale Mahalko / Scalar Tardis On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > I can imagine fields of waving grass, rubber couches and trampolines From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 17:24:24 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 17:24:24 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBE73B8.4060205@gmail.com> Here is some videos to watch... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MoQh4R1-Vjs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oOK1L0Uo8KM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfrM973spw0 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z2zDwzK5Kg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1C6LrDzjfRw ...so the ability is there. Dale Mahalko wrote: > Can you point to anything in 3D animation that already does this sort > of thing? I don't think it exists. > > The idea sounds reminiscent of an idea I posted on this list a few > years ago, wrapping a sculptie mesh around a collection of prims and > "deflating" the mesh until its vertices form-fit the prims within, > sort of like vacuum-forming with plastic, to quickly make a multiprim > object into a single sculptie. > > , > > Sending raw soft-mesh vertex points to the client to accurately show > the soft mesh shape would likely be far too slow. A simple mesh can > contain a few hundred points, each with X/Y/Z coordinates, and these > must all be adjusted for each new "frame" of the 3D renderer. > > You would probably have to simplify and generalize the soft body > modeling to make it fast enough for a slow network connection, and > leave the actual modeling up to the local computer. Define general > static forces that pin the mesh around its edge and on its surface, > such as the flattening buttons like on chair cushions. To "inflate" > the mesh into a bun or balloon, assign a general direction of billow. > And if desired, also adjust the elasticity of the rays linking > vertices together to tighten up or loosen the overall shape, such as > along seams on pillows.. > > To deform the mesh the server only sends a force and a 3D impression > shape to the client, such as a sphere X meters in diameter pressing > into the mesh surface with Y newtons of force. The client then uses > that simple data in combination with the defined static forces to > dynamically deform the soft mesh vertices, such as representing your > avatar's feet pushing down on surface of a trampoline. > > Just don't ask me to program that. :-) > > - Dale Mahalko / Scalar Tardis > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > >> I can imagine fields of waving grass, rubber couches and trampolines >> > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > From gcanaday at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 17:34:30 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 20:34:30 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics In-Reply-To: References: <4BB77E3F.6010003@gmail.com> <323722.1662.qm@web43508.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <4BBC9EB2.20301@gmail.com> <4BBCE1A4.70905@gmail.com> <4BBD228E.8060605@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBE7616.2030304@gmail.com> Soft-body would have to be client-side only. There's no way I'd want that much data going across my net connection for every single frame. Neither I nor LL has that kind of collective bandwidth. I don't know if the server just reports a rigid-body collision or if it warns of impending collisions... though now that I think about it, it probably doesn't matter. Vac-forming can be done in Maya I know. Unsure about anything else. I'm pretty confident Blender can do it. On 04/08/2010 07:04 PM, Dale Mahalko wrote: > Can you point to anything in 3D animation that already does this sort > of thing? I don't think it exists. > > The idea sounds reminiscent of an idea I posted on this list a few > years ago, wrapping a sculptie mesh around a collection of prims and > "deflating" the mesh until its vertices form-fit the prims within, > sort of like vacuum-forming with plastic, to quickly make a multiprim > object into a single sculptie. > > , > > Sending raw soft-mesh vertex points to the client to accurately show > the soft mesh shape would likely be far too slow. A simple mesh can > contain a few hundred points, each with X/Y/Z coordinates, and these > must all be adjusted for each new "frame" of the 3D renderer. > > You would probably have to simplify and generalize the soft body > modeling to make it fast enough for a slow network connection, and > leave the actual modeling up to the local computer. Define general > static forces that pin the mesh around its edge and on its surface, > such as the flattening buttons like on chair cushions. To "inflate" > the mesh into a bun or balloon, assign a general direction of billow. > And if desired, also adjust the elasticity of the rays linking > vertices together to tighten up or loosen the overall shape, such as > along seams on pillows.. > > To deform the mesh the server only sends a force and a 3D impression > shape to the client, such as a sphere X meters in diameter pressing > into the mesh surface with Y newtons of force. The client then uses > that simple data in combination with the defined static forces to > dynamically deform the soft mesh vertices, such as representing your > avatar's feet pushing down on surface of a trampoline. > > Just don't ask me to program that. :-) > > - Dale Mahalko / Scalar Tardis > > > On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:25 PM, Glen Canaday wrote: > >> I can imagine fields of waving grass, rubber couches and trampolines >> From boy.lane at yahoo.com Thu Apr 8 19:00:08 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 10:00:08 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV: The status of the Viewer Community Message-ID: <000a01cad788$63c43e90$6601a8c0@hp> As the commencement date of TPV comes closer I've compiled a list of the known 3rd party viewers and their current status. Please add if I missed anything or there are any news. Viewers stopped development for Secondlife: Imprudence (full) RealXtend (full) Luna (full) Viewers stopped development: Nicholaz (full) Rainbow/Cool (full) Viewers partly ceased/unsure: OMV, some code removed (full/text) Emerald, no statement (full) Marine's RLV, no statement (full) Hippo, no statement (full) Radegast (text) (?) Viewers continuing and self certified to TPV: KirstenLee (full) MetaBolt (text) Mobile Grid Client (text) Viewers continuing without viewer directory listing: Cool VL (full) *(full) refers to a graphical viewer, (text) refers to a text client -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/deec4d51/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 19:39:15 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 19:39:15 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 In-Reply-To: <201004081738.09911.johnniecarling@gmail.com> References: <201004081937.45554.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BBE4D65.2060009@gmail.com> <201004081738.09911.johnniecarling@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBE9353.6090702@gmail.com> Successfully compiled, yet webkit doesn't want to load (yet it loaded fine on the official V2.0 download) Copied over older LL supplied libuuid.so.1 with newer libuuid.so.1.3.0 was all that was needed, so LL just needs to upgrade their prebuilt uuid lib to 1.3+. http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-606 Johnnie Carling wrote: > On 04/08/10 5:40:53 pm, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> Maybe something special about libSM that it needs a specific version of >> libuuid, or maybe as Lance suggested, it doesn't use the the LL supplied >> versus the system version. >> > > FYI. I ran into this last fall. Using the system libuuid (libuuid.so.1.3.0 in > debian sid) worked for me. > > -- > Johnnie Carling > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > From boy.lane at yahoo.com Thu Apr 8 19:32:08 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 10:32:08 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: Message-ID: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> Thanks Joe. Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting ToS/TPV in the first place. > ----- Original Message ----- > Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 > From: Joe Linden > Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV > next Tuesday (4/13) > To: OpenSource-Dev > Message-ID: > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various > blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party > Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or > informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for > those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next > couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, > but > the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to > address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the > Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns > that > have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be > an > informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you > think > would benefit from open dialog around the subject. > > I hope to see many of you there next week. > > -- Joe From tateru.nino at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 19:50:28 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 12:50:28 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BBE95F4.3060005@gmail.com> That's the way I read it also. Also, a user's compliance to the TPVP survives the termination of the agreement (per ?11.7), so if you've already agreed to the new TOS, you're bound by the TPVP (via ?7.8) even if you terminate your agreement before 30 April, so long as you accepted the new TOS at least once. Funky. On 9/04/2010 12:32 PM, Boy Lane wrote: > Thanks Joe. > > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting > ToS/TPV in the first place. > > > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 >> From: Joe Linden >> Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV >> next Tuesday (4/13) >> To: OpenSource-Dev >> Message-ID: >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various >> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party >> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or >> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for >> those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next >> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, >> but >> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to >> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the >> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns >> that >> have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be >> an >> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: >> >> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 >> >> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you >> think >> would benefit from open dialog around the subject. >> >> I hope to see many of you there next week. >> >> -- 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 > > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From mrfrans at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 20:05:17 2010 From: mrfrans at gmail.com (Frans) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 05:05:17 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBE95F4.3060005@gmail.com> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBE95F4.3060005@gmail.com> Message-ID: Maybe we could setup a chat bridge? So people can comment from the web or opensim. Though that depends if it is going to be voice or text. -- Jeroen Frans Virtual World Technology Specialist. VesuviusGroup.com SL: Frans Charming -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/ea4be449/attachment.htm From andromedaquonset at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 20:23:28 2010 From: andromedaquonset at gmail.com (Andromeda Quonset) Date: Thu, 08 Apr 2010 21:23:28 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBE95F4.3060005@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4bbe9daa.0d0bca0a.4fbf.23ca@mx.google.com> It is my understanding that it is to be voice. At 09:05 PM 4/8/2010, Frans wrote: >Maybe we could setup a chat bridge? > >So people can comment from the web or opensim. Though that depends >if it is going to be voice or text. > > >-- >Jeroen Frans >Virtual World Technology Specialist. >VesuviusGroup.com >SL: Frans Charming From joe at lindenlab.com Thu Apr 8 22:32:27 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 22:32:27 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV provisions. If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for you. -- joe On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane wrote: > Thanks Joe. > > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting > ToS/TPV in the first place. > > > ----- Original Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 >> From: Joe Linden >> Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV >> next Tuesday (4/13) >> To: OpenSource-Dev >> Message-ID: >> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >> >> Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various >> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party >> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or >> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for >> those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next >> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, >> but >> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to >> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the >> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns >> that >> have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be >> an >> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: >> >> >> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 >> >> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you >> think >> would benefit from open dialog around the subject. >> >> I hope to see many of you there next week. >> >> -- Joe >> > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100408/30f11a80/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Thu Apr 8 23:11:53 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:11:53 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS ?13.3, I'm afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by ?13.3 suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately. Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been). Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say that "This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", but that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is disclaimed within the agreement. ?10.3 absolves the Lab and its representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain agreement. As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the TPVP, the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered remiss to act based on inadmissible representations or explanations of a contract from /the other party to the actual agreement/. That's the sort of thing lawyers warn you not to do. On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it > becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the > service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV > provisions. If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and > hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting > isn't for you. > > -- joe > > On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane > wrote: > > Thanks Joe. > > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting > ToS/TPV in the first place. > > > ----- Original Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 > From: Joe Linden > > Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog > on TVPV > next Tuesday (4/13) > To: OpenSource-Dev > > Message-ID: > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" > > Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on > various > blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced > Third Party > Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office > hour" or > informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more > synchronous for > those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over > the next > couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some > than others, but > the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd > like to > address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will > be using the > Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific > concerns that > have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. > It'll be an > informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to > others you think > would benefit from open dialog around the subject. > > I hope to see many of you there next week. > > -- 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 -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/025d852d/attachment-0001.htm From phox at modularsystems.sl Thu Apr 8 23:35:48 2010 From: phox at modularsystems.sl (Phox) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 02:35:48 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 32 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BBECAC4.9080905@modularsystems.sl> I skipped over many of the posts recently because I'm very busy but I just wanted to say as far as Emerald goes: We are continuing development and support for Second Life, clarification and details will come as we iron out the details. We are however set and have already made the necessary changes to our export code to comply fully with the TPVP, a release should be out within the next few weeks (definitely before the deadline of April 30th) with that change. Discussion about the registry is currently ongoing, I expect that we'll have this resolved by the time we release our next binary. Side note, we have a new public repository mirror, updated daily from our main branch. Feature development is centered in other branches because we don't want people releasing our code before we do again, but as far as general dev, it's all on hg.modularsystems.sl, it's a mercurial repository. The plan is to make this officially public after our next build is published and we start work on a 2.x based client, but I figured I'd post about it here before so that you guys can have a look at it. Expect it to be down occasionally, I'm still making changes. Please report any bugs or problems with it to phox at modularsystems.sl or root at modularsystems.sl. Phox On 4/9/2010 2:12 AM, opensource-dev-request at lists.secondlife.com wrote: > Send opensource-dev mailing list submissions to > opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensource-dev > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > opensource-dev-request at lists.secondlife.com > > You can reach the person managing the list at > opensource-dev-owner at lists.secondlife.com > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of opensource-dev digest..." > > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. TPV: The status of the Viewer Community (Boy Lane) > 2. Re: Snowglobe 2.0 sync with Viewer 2.0 (Dzonatas Sol) > 3. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV (Boy Lane) > 4. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV (Tateru Nino) > 5. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV (Frans) > 6. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV > (Andromeda Quonset) > 7. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV (Joe Linden) > 8. Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV (Tateru Nino) > > > > _______________________________________________ > opensource-dev mailing list > opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com > https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensource-dev > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/0a81743b/attachment.htm From sldev at free.fr Thu Apr 8 23:37:00 2010 From: sldev at free.fr (Henri Beauchamp) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:37:00 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > It'll be an informal Q&A session, What's the point if problems are not actually *addessed* and if it's just about trying to reassure people without any written warrantee given on LL's side ? > held in voice, at this location: Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough to hold a conversation in voice. Henri Beauchamp. From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 00:47:22 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 15:47:22 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Joe, You probably did not read the terms I have to agree upon login yourself. Otherwise you'd have found a better answer to the concern raised. It is not about time or any dates of policies to become effective. It is about acceptance of unacceptable terms. I can not accept the new ToS without accepting TPV, and the latter was the one you said you would like to discuss? You don't create facts in the first place to eventually negotiate them later. TPV is unacceptaple and if you are really interested in an open and unhindered discussion you should find a discussion medium that allows for this. The beta grid would be such an option. Boy ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Linden To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 1:32 PM Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV provisions. If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for you. -- joe On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane wrote: Thanks Joe. Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting ToS/TPV in the first place. ----- Original Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 From: Joe Linden Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) To: OpenSource-Dev Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think would benefit from open dialog around the subject. I hope to see many of you there next week. -- Joe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/4a92d9f8/attachment.htm From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Fri Apr 9 01:16:56 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:16:56 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Joe, nowhere do you say that you are going to feed the community response back to the people who drafted the TPV, in order to seek change. Was that implied? Nor do you say that you are going to champion the TPV community's needs with the appropriate Lindens after your 3 meetings. Was that implied? Although I would like to think that both of the above were implied, your paragraph does not actually say that. It can also be read as intending nothing more than a one-way process of explaining the intent to us, calming the restless natives as it were. Could you please quash this ungenerous reading, and state that your intention is indeed to get the TPV document improved, and that you will do what you can to make that happen? Morgaine. ================================== On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various > blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party > Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or > informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for > those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next > couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but > the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to > address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the > Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that > have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an > informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think > would benefit from open dialog around the subject. > > I hope to see many of you there next week. > > -- 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/4868658b/attachment.htm From open at autistici.org Fri Apr 9 01:31:18 2010 From: open at autistici.org (Opensource Obscure) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:31:18 +0000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> Message-ID: <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:37:00 +0200, Henri Beauchamp wrote: > Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand > spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough > to hold a conversation in voice. +1 (being Italian) I'm willing to participate and contribute in a constructive way to this debate, but I can't do that via Voice. opensource obscure From robertltux at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 04:18:58 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 07:18:58 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPV: The status of the Viewer Community In-Reply-To: <000a01cad788$63c43e90$6601a8c0@hp> References: <000a01cad788$63c43e90$6601a8c0@hp> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 10:00 PM, Boy Lane wrote: > Viewers partly ceased/unsure: > OMV, some code removed (full/text) > Emerald, no statement (full) The Emerald Developers have stated that they will have a complient viewer out by the deadline. -- Robert L Martin From robertltux at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 04:28:14 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 07:28:14 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> Message-ID: > On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:37:00 +0200, Henri Beauchamp wrote: > >> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand >> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough >> to hold a conversation in voice. > also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable. -- Robert L Martin From carlo at alinoe.com Fri Apr 9 04:43:42 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:43:42 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> Message-ID: <20100409114342.GA9865@alinoe.com> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:28:14AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: > >> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand > >> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough > >> to hold a conversation in voice. > > > also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that > there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a > rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since > we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable. That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice: so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going to be said in court at a later time. It is meant to be "informational" only, which is probably not very useful indeed, unless the information flows both ways and this will lead to a change of the TPV policy. -- Carlo Wood From open at autistici.org Fri Apr 9 04:51:28 2010 From: open at autistici.org (Opensource Obscure) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 11:51:28 +0000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <20100409114342.GA9865@alinoe.com> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> <20100409114342.GA9865@alinoe.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 9 Apr 2010 13:43:42 +0200, Carlo Wood wrote: > That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice: > so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going > to be said in court at a later time. I want to make clear that I refuse this interpretation. This approach worries me even more than the policy itself. I think this is a non-costructive, negative and offensive approach, and it should be kept out of the debate. opensource obscure From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 05:29:30 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:29:30 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <20100409114342.GA9865@alinoe.com> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> <31418af89b8ec565d9b4605eb9e2b9be@localhost> <20100409114342.GA9865@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BBF1DAA.4040604@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 in theory it should be possible to record what is said in voice, though coordinating voice with text for context would be a bit more complicated (though a video of the meeting with a good resolution and as lossless as possible codec/compression could do it in theory, a video would also help to identify who is saying what in voice) On 9/4/2010 08:43, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 07:28:14AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: >>>> Voice is a no-no for me. Being French, I can't speak and understand >>>> spoken English (and worst, American English...) well and fast enough >>>> to hold a conversation in voice. >>> >> also unless im not mistaken holding it in Voice also guarantees that >> there will not be a transcript of what was said. Unless there is now a >> rock solid low lag real time way of transcribing the voice parts since >> we are going to be discussing legal matters it needs to be recordable. > > That is probably exactly the reason why they want it to be in voice: > so that there is no transcript and nobody can use whatever is going > to be said in court at a later time. > > It is meant to be "informational" only, which is probably not very > useful indeed, unless the information flows both ways and this will > lead to a change of the TPV policy. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAku/HaYACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUrRgCfQjxNKKGbKAXBtelCXLdHtcSD lIkAnjjtfbCmTDp8rpgXhqxo3LPHNehd =U4iv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nicholaz at blueflash.cc Fri Apr 9 05:38:34 2010 From: nicholaz at blueflash.cc (Nicholaz Beresford) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 14:38:34 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Message-ID: <4BBF1FCA.8090503@blueflash.cc> Re ... > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and > accepting ToS/TPV in the first place. and > Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it > becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the > service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the > TPV provisions. I won't go to the meeting, but I have to agree with Joe's interpretation of the TOS. The ?1 of the TOS ("By continuing to access or use Second Life after the effective date of any such change, you agree to be bound by the modified Terms of Service.") makes this rather clear. And ?11.2 is worded in a similar way and IMO restates this intention. Unlike other parts of the TOS/TPV, I find those two reasonable clear and fair. I.e. the way I took it (although IANAL) is that by agreeing to the new TOS at login I merely agree I'm bound by it when accessing SL after the effective date. Nicholaz. From simon.disk29 at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 05:43:00 2010 From: simon.disk29 at gmail.com (Simon Disk) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:43:00 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP become effective. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/d027a721/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 05:51:50 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 20:51:50 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <4BBF1FCA.8090503@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: <005c01cad7e3$6dc4ea10$6401a8c0@hp> Certainly, that relates to ToS which has a commencement date in itself of 30 April. Unfortunately the linked TPV I have to agree upon login does not have a commencement date. Not that it matters if I accept it for its content or not, which I don't. Logging in and clickwrapping ToS automatically means acceptance of TPV the time I click OK. And I'm not going to do this. Especially not to create facts that are to be discussed with Joe later. If he is willing to do so. If Linden wants to open the door again for Opensource developers they should provide a medium to discuss this 3rd party viewer policy without forcing these developers beforehand to accept that exact policy in question. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nicholaz Beresford" To: ; "Boy Lane" Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 8:38 PM Subject: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV > > Re ... > > > Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and > > accepting ToS/TPV in the first place. > > and > > > Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it > > becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the > > service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the > > TPV provisions. > > > I won't go to the meeting, but I have to agree with Joe's interpretation > of the TOS. > > The ?1 of the TOS ("By continuing to access or use Second Life after the > effective date of any such change, you agree to be bound by the modified > Terms of Service.") makes this rather clear. And ?11.2 is worded in a > similar way and IMO restates this intention. Unlike other parts of the > TOS/TPV, I find those two reasonable clear and fair. > > I.e. the way I took it (although IANAL) is that by agreeing to the new TOS > at login I merely agree I'm bound by it when accessing SL after the > effective date. > > > Nicholaz. > From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 05:54:49 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 20:54:49 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> Why would I create an alt to jump stupidity on the side of LL? Not only can they track someone, but why would I let my principles of integrity and reputation go just to attend some set up meeting with a questionable agenda? ----- Original Message ----- From: Simon Disk To: Boy Lane Cc: Joe Linden ; opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 8:43 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP become effective. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/ca0c229a/attachment.htm From simon.disk29 at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 06:04:52 2010 From: simon.disk29 at gmail.com (Simon Disk) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:04:52 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <005c01cad7e3$6dc4ea10$6401a8c0@hp> References: <4BBF1FCA.8090503@blueflash.cc> <005c01cad7e3$6dc4ea10$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: ?7.7 makes the TPVP effective with the ToS. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/2569391b/attachment-0001.htm From simon.disk29 at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 06:07:12 2010 From: simon.disk29 at gmail.com (Simon Disk) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:07:12 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Why does creating an alt mean your jumping on LL's side? Why are there sides anyway? If it is an important enough issue to you, you should find a way. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/6fb05f95/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 06:05:38 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 21:05:38 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <000c01cad7e5$5bb96600$6401a8c0@hp> I don't know what you don't understand here. If I use *any* account, aka avatar, to login to SL I have to accept their ToS and TPV and other policies altogether. That is me, the RL person, not the avatar. So there is no difference in using an alt or my normal AV. Simple, isn't it :) ----- Original Message ----- From: Simon Disk To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 9:07 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Why does creating an alt mean your jumping on LL's side? Why are there sides anyway? If it is an important enough issue to you, you should find a way. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/e7f3f8fd/attachment.htm From simon.disk29 at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 06:19:12 2010 From: simon.disk29 at gmail.com (Simon Disk) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:19:12 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <000c01cad7e5$5bb96600$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> <000c01cad7e5$5bb96600$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: I understand it, the ToS and associated policies are by account, every alt account you sign in with has to accept them individually. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/aa23f1be/attachment.htm From jbhancroft at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 06:29:34 2010 From: jbhancroft at gmail.com (JB Hancroft) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 09:29:34 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Joe, Thanks for doing this. There are obviously a LOT of concerns. I'm not sure if Linden Lab is willing to do so, but sharing any additional insights about why certain parts of the TPVP were drafted the way they are, might help. My ask, of the community: This has the potential to be a meeting with a lot of emotions. We won't make any progress on this if emotions run too hot, or the discussion becomes unprofessional... degrades into personal attacks on character. And if it breaks down into a shouting match, then it's a waste of time for all of us. So please, let's do this in a professional manner. One way you can help me understand this issue, please, would be to be willing to say what the impact is on you, on your business, on your customers, etc. I think being able to quantify the effects of a policy, a decision, a direction... always help. My opinion: Disagreeing in principle because it's "wrong" is one thing; being able to relate what the impact on your involvement in Second Life will mean a lot more. Thanks, - JB P.S. To the list: Let's not try to make this a "legal" meeting, ok? Because if you do, it won't happen. On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 4:24 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various > blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party > Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or > informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for > those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next > couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but > the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to > address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the > Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that > have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an > informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think > would benefit from open dialog around the subject. > > I hope to see many of you there next week. > > -- 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/278ff298/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 06:38:06 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 21:38:06 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <006801cad7e3$dac56cc0$6401a8c0@hp> <000c01cad7e5$5bb96600$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <003a01cad7e9$e46e8300$6401a8c0@hp> This does not make any difference for a viewer developer, regardless if or if not a particular avatar is attached to a viewer. But that's where it becomes intersting. Emerald is made by a group of people. They may individually agree to ToS/TPV or not. What does it say about the Emerald viewer and it's legal standing to TPV? Nothing. ----- Original Message ----- From: Simon Disk To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 9:19 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV I understand it, the ToS and associated policies are by account, every alt account you sign in with has to accept them individually. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/810470d6/attachment.htm From joe at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 9 08:28:05 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Miller) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:28:05 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/e86c6c1c/attachment-0001.htm From joe at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 9 08:29:47 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Miller) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:29:47 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> Message-ID: <4BBF47EB.50407@lindenlab.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/c5e408ce/attachment.htm From joe at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 9 08:30:49 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Miller) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:30:49 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BBF4829.9020100@lindenlab.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/0945180f/attachment.htm From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Fri Apr 9 08:42:02 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:42:02 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: I'm afraid that won't work. The ToS is an agreement between you (the user) and Linden Lab, not your avatar and LL. Personally I think a meeting such as this where many won't be involved due to the wording of the ToS and TPVP are preventing major TPV devs from entering this discussion would be better suited on a non-LL controlled grid. Maybe one of the other opensim grids would be a better choice. Ron Festa Virtual Worlds Admin Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY Phone: 732-474-8583 On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Simon Disk wrote: > Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag > meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP > become effective. > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/8c2420c1/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 08:44:48 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 01:44:48 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> My apologies, Joe - I'll email you directly. On 10/04/2010 1:28 AM, Joe Miller wrote: > Tateru, > > You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the > words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered > before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010. (See the blog post here > > with additional words to that effect.) The updated TOS text was > pushed to everyone so they would have the benefit of a full 30 days to > review it before acknowledging formal acceptance of it by accessing > the system after April 30. > > So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about > contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're > trying to make. The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by > all Residents of record prior to March 31. After April 30, everything > you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate. > > The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and > the concerns raised by several members of the open source community. > I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address > those concerns. Those who do not wish to participate in that > synchronous event can email me instead if they so choose. Again, I'm > looking forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address > specific shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other > channel. > > If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come. > > -- Joe > > > Tateru Nino wrote: >> That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS ?13.3, >> I'm afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the >> agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by ?13.3 >> suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately. >> >> Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to >> be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been). >> Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say >> that "This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", >> but that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is >> disclaimed within the agreement. ?10.3 absolves the Lab and its >> representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the >> agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain >> agreement. >> >> As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the >> TPVP, the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered >> remiss to act based on inadmissible representations or explanations >> of a contract from /the other party to the actual agreement/. That's >> the sort of thing lawyers warn you not to do. >> >> >> On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote: >>> Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it >>> becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the >>> service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the >>> TPV provisions. If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and >>> hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting >>> isn't for you. >>> >>> -- joe >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane >> > wrote: >>> >>> Thanks Joe. >>> >>> Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting >>> ToS/TPV in the first place. >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 >>> -0700 >>> From: Joe Linden > >>> Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue >>> dialog on TVPV >>> next Tuesday (4/13) >>> To: OpenSource-Dev >> > >>> Message-ID: >>> >> > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" >>> >>> Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, >>> on various >>> blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently >>> introduced Third Party >>> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office >>> hour" or >>> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more >>> synchronous for >>> those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these >>> over the next >>> couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some >>> than others, but >>> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. >>> I'd like to >>> address questions about the intent of the policy, how we >>> will be using the >>> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the >>> specific concerns that >>> have been raised by the community over the past several >>> weeks. It'll be an >>> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: >>> >>> http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 >>> >>> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to >>> others you think >>> would benefit from open dialog around the subject. >>> >>> I hope to see many of you there next week. >>> >>> -- 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 >> >> -- >> Tateru Nino >> http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/0af36a02/attachment-0001.htm From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Fri Apr 9 08:45:12 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:45:12 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Would Skype be an option? --piping up from the peanut gallery... On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Ron Festa wrote: > I'm afraid that won't work. The ToS is an agreement between you (the user) > and Linden Lab, not your avatar and LL. > > Personally I think a meeting such as this where many won't be involved due > to the wording of the ToS and TPVP are preventing major TPV devs from > entering this discussion would be better suited on a non-LL controlled grid. > Maybe one of the other opensim grids would be a better choice. > > Ron Festa > Virtual Worlds Admin > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:43 AM, Simon Disk wrote: > >> Create an alt account for the sole purpose of attending the Brown-Bag >> meetings, then cancel the account on April 29, 2010 before the ToS/TPVP >> become effective. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: >> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev >> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting >> privileges >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/678c4ae4/attachment.htm From joe at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 9 08:49:48 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Miller) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 08:49:48 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BBF4C9C.4010202@lindenlab.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/08878801/attachment.htm From robertltux at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 08:51:50 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:51:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson wrote: > Would Skype be an option? > --piping up from the peanut gallery... > 1 not every stake holder even has skype 2 still has the not recordable problem 3 would it even scale to the needed level?? -- Robert L Martin From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Fri Apr 9 08:54:40 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 08:54:40 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Issues understood. I've just been remembering previous in-world meetings that were simulcast on skype, although I also remembered that they couldn't get it working... On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Robert Martin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson > wrote: > > Would Skype be an option? > > --piping up from the peanut gallery... > > > 1 not every stake holder even has skype > 2 still has the not recordable problem > 3 would it even scale to the needed level?? > -- > Robert L Martin > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/ca64b644/attachment.htm From I_really_needed_a_new_mailbox at gmx.de Fri Apr 9 09:00:14 2010 From: I_really_needed_a_new_mailbox at gmx.de (Zai Lynch) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 18:00:14 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: @transcript/recording concerns: Some might remember the Adult content transition and the related brown-bag meetings. Audio recordings were uploaded and transcripts of those were published, like in https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Linden_Lab_Official:Adult_Oriented_content_controls:_merchant_meeting_transcript Maybe something like that is possible for these meetings here as well. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/8eea5694/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 08:50:24 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 23:50:24 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBF4829.9020100@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <001b01cad7fd$2da47210$6401a8c0@hp> As I and others wrote, you may want to change to a neutral platform that does not require one to clickwrap a policy that is to be discussed. The Betagrid would be such an option, and I assume all involved developers have accounts old enough to be in the database. Please also move away from that voice plan. Many people are not fluent in English but can read and write. Thanks! ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Miller To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 11:30 PM Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Boy, So it's sounds like you won't be able to join me. Sorry to hear that. -- joe Boy Lane wrote: Joe, You probably did not read the terms I have to agree upon login yourself. Otherwise you'd have found a better answer to the concern raised. It is not about time or any dates of policies to become effective. It is about acceptance of unacceptable terms. I can not accept the new ToS without accepting TPV, and the latter was the one you said you would like to discuss? You don't create facts in the first place to eventually negotiate them later. TPV is unacceptaple and if you are really interested in an open and unhindered discussion you should find a discussion medium that allows for this. The beta grid would be such an option. Boy ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Linden To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Friday, April 09, 2010 1:32 PM Subject: Re: Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Of course you can. The ToS presented at login clearly states it becomes effective on 4/30. In the meantime, you continue to use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain the TPV provisions. If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement, and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting isn't for you. -- joe On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy Lane wrote: Thanks Joe. Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting ToS/TPV in the first place. ----- Original Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700 From: Joe Linden Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) To: OpenSource-Dev Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think would benefit from open dialog around the subject. I hope to see many of you there next week. -- Joe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/5b0c4a63/attachment-0001.htm From joe at lindenlab.com Fri Apr 9 09:08:54 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Miller) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 09:08:54 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BBF5116.5050203@lindenlab.com> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/13b0f9b8/attachment.htm From joel.foner at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 09:09:44 2010 From: joel.foner at gmail.com (Joel Foner) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 12:09:44 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: All of these are recordable, actually, and there is always the option of a voice conference call that is recorded. The technology really shouldn't be a limiting factor in having a discussion on any of these platforms if creating a record is a primary concern. (Including Second Life with video, voice and text chat - takes a few computers and some media production understanding, but that's a configuration I've been running for a long time for various projects. IIRC Skype is limited to either 10 or 20 people on a call, but again there are any number of conference call services using regular phones that can either in the service record, or be recorded by a connected computer. Joel On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Robert Martin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Erik Anderson > wrote: > > Would Skype be an option? > > --piping up from the peanut gallery... > > > 1 not every stake holder even has skype > 2 still has the not recordable problem > 3 would it even scale to the needed level?? -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/51a33ca5/attachment.htm From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Fri Apr 9 09:33:20 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 18:33:20 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <4BBF47EB.50407@lindenlab.com> References: <20100409083700.d6f34cf2.sldev@free.fr> <4BBF47EB.50407@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <4BBF56D0.3010209@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/09/2010 05:29 PM, Joe Miller wrote: > Henri, > > Sorry you can't participate. Joe, Is there a compelling reason why the meeting cannot be hold in text? It looks like that'd accommodate more developers of both, Snowgobe and Third Party Viewers. A lot of us aren't native speakers and are much more fluent in writing than speaking. Also, the chat history allows everyone to catch up at their own pace while when one has missed something said in voice, the next chance to get it is when the record is published (if any). Some few even still have technical issues with voice and can't use it reliably (or sometimes at all) even if they'd want to. > Henri Beauchamp wrote: >> On Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: >> >>> It'll be an informal Q&A session, >> What's the point if problems are not actually *addessed* and if >> it's just about trying to reassure people without any written >> warrantee given on LL's side ? >> Q&A might help to see what needs to be addressed, and how. I'm looking at these meetings as one of the first steps, not the last. Looking forward to some more cooperation Boroondas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/58c16ae2/attachment.htm From secret.argent at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 09:33:56 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 11:33:56 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything. From robertltux at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 09:41:05 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 12:41:05 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I > tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually > get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data > because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything. > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > this may sound a bit crazy but how many stakeholders have Google Wave accounts?? -- Robert L Martin From moriz.gupte at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 09:46:51 2010 From: moriz.gupte at gmail.com (Moriz Gupte) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 10:46:51 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: i do On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Robert Martin wrote: > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Argent Stonecutter > wrote: > > Holding the meeting in voice already excludes people. The last time I > > tried to enable voice for a meeting with a Linden I couldn't actually > > get it to work. The dot came up, and my computer was receiving data > > because his dot was showing activity, but I couldn't hear anything. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > this may sound a bit crazy but how many stakeholders have Google Wave > accounts?? > > -- > Robert L Martin > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- 'Consider how the lilies grow. They do not labor or spin.' Rameshsharma Ramloll PhD Research Assistant Professor Idaho State University, PocatelloTel: 208-282-5333 More info at http://tr.im/RRamloll -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/0307fd14/attachment.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 10:45:41 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 10:45:41 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604 Message-ID: <61410.18840.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20 Could a Linden please take a look? Thanks Nicky -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/25bfb4d5/attachment-0001.htm From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Fri Apr 9 11:29:22 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 20:29:22 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> References: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: > I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable > proposals to address those concerns. Those who do not wish to > participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they > so choose. My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original linden labs sourcecode. My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, or distribute. IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers. bye, LC From nicholaz at blueflash.cc Fri Apr 9 12:17:53 2010 From: nicholaz at blueflash.cc (Nicholaz Beresford) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 21:17:53 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag Message-ID: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a meeting anyway). First of all, I believe the current TPV is broken beyond repair. The main reason is that responsibilities for users, developers and viewer dictionary are mixed into a mess and that many burdens/agreements which IMO belong in the category of preferred partners (viewer directory) are mushed into other sections. I'm sure it's confusing to the users and it's obvious (by previous discussion here) that it's confusing for developers. Below is a way to structure the TPV which I would have found acceptable (fleshed out details nonwithstanding): 1) Explain what an acceptable TPV is and keep it to the core concerns: - protection of copyright (blatant violations of permissions) - protection of user accounts (passwords, etc.) - protection of the service in general (viewer crashing, server load, etc.) 2) Make a section which applies to users (anyone who uses a TPV to connect to SL) and leverage your main goals through that: - prohibit use of viewers which violate the concerns under 1) - reserve the right to block access by such viewers - reserve the right to request stopping use of those and eventually to ban accounts using such viewers - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when using a TPV - instruct users that is their responsibility to do their DD when choosing a TPV and that they have to deal with the outcome - instruct users how to look for acceptable viewers (points listed below under 3) and recommend usage of viewers from 4) 3) Make a section for other viewer developers in general and keep requests/agreements to a bare minimum and easy to comply with - explain that if developer uses his/her viewer to connect to SL, he/she is also a user under 2) - in addition request the following - visible disclaimer about non affiliation with LL - visible notice to end users that usage being governed by the TPV policy - visible notice about account and privacy protection - visible notice about support (i.e. non-support by LL) - make it plain and simple and refrain from requesting a card blanche for broad and/or future demands (the whole TOS is transferable, and even if a developer would trust LL's good intentions, a potential buyer of LL may not be seen to have those). (See the middle part of the blog post from the Imprudence folks, these were mainly my concerns too: http://imprudenceviewer.org/2010/03/26/an-important-announcement-regarding-the-third-party-viewer-policy/) 4) Make a section for the viewer directory. Put the more far reaching requests into that for those who want to be listed there in order to gain exposure - naming conventions beyond the existing trademark policies - promise of adjustment/removal of features and other nice (for LL) to have cooperation - whatever else beyond 3) may be on LL's wishlist These are just from the top of my head and obviously I'm merely speaking for myself only and from the armchair in the off even. Nicholaz. From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 12:32:06 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:32:06 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their own assets? On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: > >> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable >> proposals to address those concerns. Those who do not wish to >> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they >> so choose. > > My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is > worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the > feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original > linden labs sourcecode. > > My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): > > 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. > If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED > features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT > YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. > > 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and > defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, > or distribute. > IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE > SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. > Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party > Viewers. > > > bye, > LC > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a =ju4j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Fri Apr 9 13:13:34 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:13:34 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> References: <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004092213.35427.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Tigro Spottystripes: > isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers > legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of > the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their > own assets? that's exactly my point. why would i have to be responsible for a bug in original LL code just because i happened to recompile the source, when LL themselves doesn't take any responsibility at all for the same bug? > > On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote: > > Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: > >> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable > >> proposals to address those concerns. Those who do not wish to > >> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if > >> they so choose. > > > > My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it > > is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects > > at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in > > the original linden labs sourcecode. > > > > My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): > > > > 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party > > Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all > > CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of > > Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. > > > > 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and > > defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you > > develop, or distribute. > > IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS > > SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. > > Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party > > Viewers. > > > > > > bye, > > LC > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 13:37:01 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 17:37:01 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TPVP In-Reply-To: <201004092213.35427.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> <201004092213.35427.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <4BBF8FED.7030904@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 ah, ok, sorry, i thought you meant the parts in all caps were stuff you changed and since i haven't memorized the exact wording of the latest version of the TPVP i assumed you just had changed the wording somehow On 9/4/2010 17:13, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Tigro Spottystripes: >> isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers >> legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of >> the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their >> own assets? > > that's exactly my point. > why would i have to be responsible for a bug in original LL code just > because i happened to recompile the source, when LL themselves doesn't > take any responsibility at all for the same bug? > > >> >> On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote: >>> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: >>>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable >>>> proposals to address those concerns. Those who do not wish to >>>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if >>>> they so choose. >>> >>> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it >>> is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects >>> at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in >>> the original linden labs sourcecode. >>> >>> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): >>> >>> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party >>> Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all >>> CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of >>> Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. >>> >>> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and >>> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you >>> develop, or distribute. >>> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS >>> SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. >>> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party >>> Viewers. >>> >>> >>> bye, >>> LC >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAku/j9sACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWk5QCcD6M81uC4nP8xryHGAftCvzBM cG4Ani9pSlxcerMCr7sLHdTA7+UmpOBE =dEHr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 13:53:54 2010 From: thickbrick.sleaford at gmail.com (Thickbrick Sleaford) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 23:53:54 +0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604 In-Reply-To: <61410.18840.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <61410.18840.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <201004092353.54482.thickbrick.sleaford@gmail.com> On Friday 09 April 2010 20:45:41 Nicky Perian wrote: > http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa > 4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20 > > Could a Linden please take a look? > > Thanks > Nicky The S3 urls in doc/asset_urls.txt give a 403 error ("Access Denied"): http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/browser/projects/2009/snowglobe/trunk/doc/asset_urls.txt This looks like it's the same problem as with build log urls from sldev-commit messages, which we discussed yesterday at the open source meeting. Merov said he will be looking into it, IIRC. -- Thickbrick From blakar at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 14:02:05 2010 From: blakar at gmail.com (Dirk Moerenhout) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 23:02:05 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> References: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> Message-ID: No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal interpretation of the TPVP. I wish Joe good luck but I can imagine this may end up being a serious waste of his time. Dirk On 9 April 2010 21:32, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV developers > legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with the license of the > code they use to create TPVs) instead of just covering their own assets? > > On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote: >> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: >> >>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable >>> proposals to address those concerns. ?Those who do not wish to >>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if they >>> so choose. >> >> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it is >> worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects at the >> feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in the original >> linden labs sourcecode. >> >> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): >> >> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. >> If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED >> features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT >> YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. >> >> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and >> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, >> or distribute. >> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE >> SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. >> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party >> Viewers. >> >> >> bye, >> LC >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE > cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a > =ju4j > -----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 > From nickyperian at yahoo.com Fri Apr 9 14:23:44 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 14:23:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604 In-Reply-To: <201004092353.54482.thickbrick.sleaford@gmail.com> References: <61410.18840.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <201004092353.54482.thickbrick.sleaford@gmail.com> Message-ID: <297527.48692.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Thickbrick, Thanks Nicky Couldn't make the meeting yesterday. ________________________________ From: Thickbrick Sleaford To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Cc: Nicky Perian Sent: Fri, April 9, 2010 3:53:54 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604 On Friday 09 April 2010 20:45:41 Nicky Perian wrote: > http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa > 4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20 > > Could a Linden please take a look? > > Thanks > Nicky The S3 urls in doc/asset_urls.txt give a 403 error ("Access Denied"): http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/browser/projects/2009/snowglobe/trunk/doc/asset_urls.txt This looks like it's the same problem as with build log urls from sldev-commit messages, which we discussed yesterday at the open source meeting. Merov said he will be looking into it, IIRC. -- Thickbrick -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100409/e092e32d/attachment-0001.htm From sldev at catznip.com Fri Apr 9 14:42:57 2010 From: sldev at catznip.com (Kitty) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 23:42:57 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Login response request/processing in 1.23 vsSnowglobe / 2.0 In-Reply-To: <1FC6FF30A74A46A3B306526E0FEDDD19@panther> References: <1FC6FF30A74A46A3B306526E0FEDDD19@panther> Message-ID: <65EC42063AAD4DDFA7144DB761D9A0EB@panther> Found a likely cause... Viewer 2.0 (and Snowglobe) isn't requesting a gzipped response from the login server which causes the login reply to take much, much longer to download than it does with 1.23. Is there any chance someone forget to build libcurl with zlib? Kitty From secret.argent at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 15:12:06 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 17:12:06 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: <8FA0ABAE-EDB9-4E16-A581-EC0B8E15FD69@gmail.com> On 2010-04-09, at 14:17, Nicholaz Beresford wrote: > I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of > suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a > meeting anyway). [...] I can't attend, because scheduling, firewalls, and voice are too great a hurdle, but what Nicholaz wrote is pretty much what I'd want to have said. :) From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Fri Apr 9 15:14:33 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 00:14:33 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: References: <4BBF80B6.5030803@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004100014.33721.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Fact is that the TPV policy, point 7, is open to interpretation. as long as the wording is not unambiguous, people will continue to interpret it in different ways. and as long as it is not rewritten, anything along the lines of "but we mean it like this" being said by anyone is not going to matter at all. bye, LC Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Dirk Moerenhout: > No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give > TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and > not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything > about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples > personal interpretation of the TPVP. I wish Joe good luck but I > can imagine this may end up being a serious waste of his time. > > Dirk > > On 9 April 2010 21:32, Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > isn't the real issue there that LL is trying to give TPV > > developers legal liabilities (that might be incompatible with > > the license of the code they use to create TPVs) instead of just > > covering their own assets? > > > > On 9/4/2010 15:29, Lance Corrimal wrote: > >> Am Freitag 09 April 2010 schrieb Joe Miller: > >>> I intend to listen to listen to all reasonable > >>> proposals to address those concerns. Those who do not wish to > >>> participate in that synchronous event can email me instead if > >>> they so choose. > >> > >> My concern about the TPV is mainly with section 7, which, as it > >> is worded right now, places full responsibility for all defects > >> at the feet of a third party developer, even if the bug is in > >> the original linden labs sourcecode. > >> > >> My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): > >> > >> 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party > >> Viewers. If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all > >> CHANGED OR ADDED features, functionality, code, and content of > >> Third-Party Viewers THAT YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. > >> > >> 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and > >> defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you > >> develop, or distribute. > >> IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS > >> SOFTWARE SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. > >> Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any > >> Third-Party Viewers. > >> > >> > >> bye, > >> LC > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > > > iEYEARECAAYFAku/gLEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXFEgCdE+zAwPPwaD8v8FpXPfHGUzRE > > cksAn0oVmNG2CdhLIkX+BjAQwoIWzq8a > > =ju4j > > -----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 > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com Fri Apr 9 16:17:04 2010 From: snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com (Maya Remblai) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 17:17:04 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: <4BBFB570.6010802@dragonkeepcreations.com> I agree with this outline, it makes far more sense. However I did want to point out this one minor detail: Nicholaz Beresford wrote: > - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when > using a TPV > I assume you meant problems arising *because* of using a TPV. A user has every right to expect help when their sim crashes, or a greifer shows up on mainland, regardless of what viewer they're using. Saying "end-user" implies that, but I'd prefer more black and white wording. It's entirely possible for a Linden to say "Oh, I can't help you because you're on a TPV" if it's not completely clear. Maya From lists.secondlife.com at trap.wereanimal.net Fri Apr 9 15:43:51 2010 From: lists.secondlife.com at trap.wereanimal.net (lists.secondlife.com at trap.wereanimal.net) Date: Fri, 9 Apr 2010 18:43:51 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <4BBF4C9C.4010202@lindenlab.com> References: <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> <4BBF4C9C.4010202@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <201004091843.51185.lists.secondlife.com@trap.wereanimal.net> On Friday 09 April 2010 11:49:48 am Joe Miller wrote: > 
> 
> 
> 
>   
>   
> 
> 
> No apology necessary.  I just wanted to restate that if TPV authors
> are staying away from this meeting because of some perceived "catch-22" on
> acceptance of the updated TOS, that shouldn't be an issue as they are
> governed by the TOS in effect prior to 3/31.

> 

> Tateru Nino wrote:
> 

>     http-equiv="Content-Type">
> My apologies, Joe - I'll email you directly.

>   

> On 10/04/2010 1:28 AM, Joe Miller wrote:
>   

>       http-equiv="Content-Type">
> Tateru,

>     

> You can continue down this road if you wish, but the facts are the
> words in 13.3 do not become effective for Residents who had registered
> before March 31, 2010 until April 30 2010.  (See the blog post   moz-do-not-send="true"
>  href="https://blogs.secondlife.com/community/community/blog/2010/03/31/upd
> ated-second-life-terms-of-service">here with additional words to that
> effect.)  The updated TOS text was pushed to everyone so they would
> have the benefit of a full 30 days to review it before acknowledging
> formal acceptance of it by accessing the system after April 30.  

>     

> So, please, do not add to the rhetoric here by telling me about
> contract law, charges of fraud, coercion or whatever point you're
> trying to make.  The TOS in force today was the agreement accepted by
> all Residents of record prior to March 31.  After April 30, everything
> you say about section 13.3 in the new TOS is reasonably accurate.

>     

> The purpose of my brown bag is to talk about the new TPV policy and the
> concerns raised by several members of the open source community.  I
> intend to listen to listen to all reasonable proposals to address those
> concerns.  Those who do not wish to participate in that synchronous
> event can email me instead if they so choose.   Again, I'm
> looking forward to a productive exchange of specific ideas to address
> specific shared concerns, whether at these meetings or via some other
> channel.
 

> If you have nothing to offer, there is no reason to come.

>     

> -- Joe

>     

>     

> Tateru Nino wrote:
>     

>         http-equiv="Content-Type">
> That clear statement is inadmissible by the terms of the TOS §13.3,
> I'm afraid, which disclaims such as not being a valid part of the
> agreement. No part of the agreement that is made admissible by §13.3
> suggests or implies any commencement date other than immediately.

>       

> Nor does it permit any explanation, FAQ, supplement, or discussion to
> be considered relevant (except as provided, which none have been).
> Boilerplate it may be, but it is binding boilerplate. It could say that
> "This agreement grants you a lifetime supply of banana custard", but
> that's not actually in there. It would be an assurance that is
> disclaimed within the agreement. §10.3 absolves the Lab and its
> representatives of charges of fraud if they say something about the
> agreements that aren't strictly speaking true, in order to obtain
> agreement.

>       

> As a general rule for contracts and agreements (leaving aside the TPVP,
> the TOS, and Linden Lab for a moment), it's widely considered remiss to
> act based on inadmissible representations or explanations of a contract
> from the other party to the actual agreement. That's the sort
> of thing lawyers warn you not to do.

>       

>       

> On 9/04/2010 3:32 PM, Joe Linden wrote:
>       
  cite="mid:i2m6b9495c41004082232mc2320c1by1c03619be336fdbc at mail.gmail.com"
>  type="cite">Of course you can.  The ToS presented at login clearly
> states it becomes effective on 4/30.  In the meantime, you continue to
> use the service under the terms of the prior ToS which doesn't contain
> the TPV provisions.  If one has issues with the prior ToS agreement,
> and hasn't previously accepted those terms, then I agree, this meeting
> isn't for you.

>         

> -- joe

>         

>         
On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Boy
> Lane <  href="mailto:boy.lane at yahoo.com">boy.lane at yahoo.com>
> wrote:

>         
  style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">Thanks Joe.

>           

> Unfortunately one can not attend without going inworld and accepting

> ToS/TPV in the first place.

>           

>           

>           
  style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
> 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">----- Original
> Message ----- Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2010 13:24:57 -0700

> From: Joe Linden <  href="mailto:joe at lindenlab.com"
> target="_blank">joe at lindenlab.com>
 Subject: [opensource-dev]
> Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV
 next Tuesday (4/13)

> To: OpenSource-Dev <  href="mailto:opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com"
> target="_blank">opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com>

> Message-ID:

> <  href="mailto:v2k6b9495c41004081324ibd5ec762zb8d098a09c7f010f at mail.gmail.co
> m"
> target="_blank">v2k6b9495c41004081324ibd5ec762zb8d098a09c7f010f at mail.gmail
> .com>
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

>             

> Hello, all.  I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on
> various
 blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced
> Third Party

> Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or

> informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous
> for

> those who are interested.  I plan to hold three of these over the
> next
 couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than
> others, but

> the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT.  I'd like
> to
 address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be
> using the

> Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns
> that

> have been raised by the community over the past several weeks.  It'll
> be an

> informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location:

>             

>               href="http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229
> /230/29"
> target="_blank">http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Se
> rvices/229/230/29
 

> No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you
> think

> would benefit from open dialog around the subject.

>             

> I hope to see many of you there next week.

>             

> -- Joe

>           

>           

>           

>         

>         

>         

>         

> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>   href="http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev">http://wiki.secondli
> fe.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to
> keep unmoderated posting privileges
 

>       

>       
--
> Tateru Nino
>   href="http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/">http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ a> 

>       

> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>   href="http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev">http://wiki.secondli
> fe.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to
> keep unmoderated posting privileges
 

>   

>   

>   
--
> Tateru Nino
>   href="http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/">http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ a> 

>   
> 

> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>  href="http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev">http://wiki.secondli
> fe.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to
> keep unmoderated posting privileges
 

> 
> 
>
Can someone please translate the above into readable English. From jay_reynolds_freeman at mac.com Fri Apr 9 16:18:55 2010 From: jay_reynolds_freeman at mac.com (Jay Reynolds Freeman) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 16:18:55 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <11222935-012A-4A17-ADCC-3DA94F9430E2@mac.com> CeeJay Tigerpaw squeaks up: I think there is rather a meta issue here which should be articulated again clearly, before the meeting, that has to do with the interaction between substantial established businesses and the open-source/third-party-developer community. Let me see if I can describe it. It is common for substantial established businesses -- such as Linden Laboratories -- to use legal agreements of various kinds to attempt to protect themselves from one another: When a lot of businesses do that, the result sometimes looks rather like threat display among elephants; everybody spreads out their ears and wiggles them in an intimidating manner, and if everybody is sufficiently intimidated there probably won't be any actual fighting. Avoiding fighting is all to the good -- after all, that is what threat displays are for. Lawyers are part of a grand tradition of intimidation among animals. Unfortunately, there is a problem when using the same tactic with the open-source/third-party-developer community: Most of the individual members of that community surely do not retain lawyers to assist in development and distribution of code. To that extent, we have very small ears, and we are easily intimidated. We are mice, and when elephants wiggle their ears, sensible mice run away and hide. Evolution exerts great pressure for mice to be very sensible. Therefore, *if* a substantial established business should happen to make a business decision, to the effect that open-source/third-party developers are valuable resources, *then* it follows that said business should make efforts not to scare off the mice. In particular, any legal agreements which that business expects open-source/third-party developers to agree with, should not only (1) protect those developers, but also (2) make clear just what protection is afforded, in language that is both (a) legally binding and (b) easily understandable without the aid of a lawyer (since developers probably do not retain lawyers). I am not a lawyer and do not play one on the Internet, but I believe I understand that goals (2a) and (2b) above may be difficult to achieve at the same time; yet if they are not achieved then the mice will all run away and the business will lose valuable resources: The business's lawyers will inadvertently have acted contrary to the business's own interests. I believe the essence of the problem here is that depending on just what LL actually thinks of the open-source/third-party-developer community, we may have an instance of this issue; if so, LL needs to think carefully how to make its legal position best further its business interests. Now excuse me while I scamper off; I think I have a piece of cheese in my mousehole ... CeeJay Tigerpaw --------------------- Jay_Reynolds_Freeman at mac.com http://web.mac.com/jay_reynolds_freeman (personal web site) From mrfrans at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 17:11:19 2010 From: mrfrans at gmail.com (Frans) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 02:11:19 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <201004091843.51185.lists.secondlife.com@trap.wereanimal.net> References: <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> <4BBF4C9C.4010202@lindenlab.com> <201004091843.51185.lists.secondlife.com@trap.wereanimal.net> Message-ID: That's odd. But you can browse the list here. https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-April/thread.html Scroll to the bottom. -- Jeroen Frans Virtual World Technology Specialist. VesuviusGroup.com SL: Frans Charming -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/e17d1eda/attachment-0001.htm From danielravennest at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 17:30:24 2010 From: danielravennest at gmail.com (Daniel) Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2010 19:30:24 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> Dirk Moerenhout wrote: No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal interpretation of the TPVP. -------------- If it is badly enough written that people get that idea from reading it, it should be made clearer. I have read it, and the following sections can plausibly be read as imposing liability on a developer: " If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers that you develop or distribute." " You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute" If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would be more clear. The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute". The GNU GPL license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No Warranty paragraphs 11 and 12. Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL. From armin.weatherwax at googlemail.com Fri Apr 9 18:19:09 2010 From: armin.weatherwax at googlemail.com (Armin Weatherwax) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 03:19:09 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> Message-ID: <201004100319.09480.Armin.Weatherwax@gmail.com> Daniel wrote: > No, the real issue is that some people _THINK_ LL is trying to give > TPV developers legal liabilities. This is about interpretation and > not facts. Unless I missed something LL has never stated anything > about legal liabilities, it's solely based on some peoples personal > interpretation of the TPVP. this is, in fact, also an interpretation and not facts. Not favouring one of those interpretations over the other, just being descriptive. Armin From blakar at gmail.com Fri Apr 9 19:19:00 2010 From: blakar at gmail.com (Dirk Moerenhout) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 04:19:00 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> Message-ID: > If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW > features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would > be more clear. That will create a false sense of safety. When LL removes code from the source tree for legal reasons you'd make a TPV developer believe that he's not liable for that code if he keeps on distributing it (as you just made him believe he's only responsible for what developed/added himself). Yet when he has been informed that the code can not be legally distributed willful continued distribution is an issue and may see him ending up in court. Off course he should know this if he reads and understands the GPL. The GPL clearly demonstrates responsibility for distribution in section 7. > The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute". ?The GNU GPL > license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further > restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." > (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No > Warranty > paragraphs 11 and 12. ?Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, > risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL. No it should not. For starters you do not quote it in full. It actually says "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute. Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers." Punctuation is used for readability but doesn't remove the second sentence from the context. This is LL waving responsibility more than it is about who it transfers to. If you consider section 11 and 12 of the GPL this is a reiteration of "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.". Note that LL did not restrict you from passing the risks on to the users of your TPV (they actually imply it transfers to them already). Granted. In the TPVP, like most similar legal documents, they have reiterated quite a few points that are covered already for example by the GPL or the TOS. But as I stated before I still need to see the first sensible example of how this affects somebody beyond what they should expect regardless of the TPVP. Dirk From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 10 05:48:28 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 14:48:28 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <201004091843.51185.lists.secondlife.com@trap.wereanimal.net> References: <4BBF4B70.6020108@gmail.com> <4BBF4C9C.4010202@lindenlab.com> <201004091843.51185.lists.secondlife.com@trap.wereanimal.net> Message-ID: <20100410124828.GA25515@alinoe.com> In case you're using linux and mutt. I'm using mutt and have in my .mutt/muttrc the following line: auto_view text/html Then I have in ~/.mutt/mailcap the line: text/html; w3m -dump %s; copiousoutput; nametemplate=%s.html On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 06:43:51PM -0400, lists.secondlife.com at trap.wereanimal.net wrote: > Can someone please translate the above into readable English. -- Carlo Wood From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 05:54:04 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 07:54:04 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] OpenLSL Q&A Invite Message-ID: Everyone, I'm a big fan of mailing lists and all of you whom I've spoken with have answered numerous questions of mine. So, I wanted to invite you all to a little experiment of mine. I've long dreamed of a portal just for LSL Scripters that people can go to and get their answer in a more organized way. Email is limited, unfortunately. So, this will be free to join and you can sign up if you want to, or choose not to if you wish. I figure this will be a more organized way to get your questions answered than having to sift through emails for your answer. The URL is http://openlsl.stackexchange.com/ and I would love to have the community help me on this project, if they are willing. Anyway, I won't take up too much more of your time. Thank you for joining and contributing! Best Regards, Jonathan Irvin P.S. I'm opening this to ALL LSL Scripters as well as anyone who wishes to join and contribute including OpenSim, OpenSource-Dev, and the like. P.P.S. Sorry for the spam! This was meant to be an invite. If you don't feel invited, then feel free to disregard this email. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/6fcea03d/attachment.htm From aleric.inglewood at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 06:09:28 2010 From: aleric.inglewood at gmail.com (Aleric Inglewood) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:09:28 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <4BBEC529.9010308@gmail.com> <4BBF4785.6010808@lindenlab.com> <201004092029.22871.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: This doesn't cut it, as the whole problem is that open source developers should NOT have to take any legal liablity. The risk are entirely for the user. The goal that we seek is that the TPV policy makes clear that: 1) A developer can have his viewer blocked (and even his account deleted) if he refuses to comply with change requests by LL. 2) The user takes all risks, as in: a user can NEVER hold the developer responsible for any damages (the usual GPL blah blah). NO WARRANTY, NOT LIABILITY. Nobody should even THINK of trying to sue a developer because using his code did or didn't do this or that. 3) The user can be held responsible for his actions (he can never claim that he didn't know it wasn't allowed). AND (!) 1a) A developer will never be sued by Linden Lab because he made changes to GPL-ed code and/or distributed GPL-ed code. 3a) The developer of a TPV that is being used by a user has nothing to do with whatever that user does. It is a business between Linden Lab and the user (some other section will say that also Linden Lab takes no responsibility). LL CAN take (legal) action against the user, but the developer is out of the picture. On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 8:29 PM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > My suggestion for changes to this (my changes are in CAPS): > > 7.a You are responsible for all uses you make of Third-Party Viewers. > If you are a Developer, you are responsible for all CHANGED OR ADDED > features, functionality, code, and content of Third-Party Viewers THAT > YOU DEVELOP AND DISTRIBUTE. > Sorry, but being responsible for changed or added code is not acceptable; at least, not if that means "legal action". 7.d IF YOU ARE A developer, You assume all risks, expenses, and > defects IN ANY MODIFICATIONS OF Third-Party Viewers that you develop, > or distribute. > This TOTALLY unacceptable. Open source developers CANNOT assume all risks *expenses* and defects; we introduce bugs too. If the user doesn't like those bugs their option is to not use the viewer. That's it. If Linden Lab doesn't like the bugs (or features) they can block the viewer from their network; no start some legal action against an individual. IF YOU ARE A USER, YOU AGREE TO THE FACT THAT YOU USE THIS SOFTWARE > SOLELY AT YOUR OWN RISK. > Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party > Viewers. > Official CC to Joe since voice doesn't work for me. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/a6cedc8f/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 10 06:22:50 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:22:50 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <001b01cad7fd$2da47210$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBF4829.9020100@lindenlab.com> <001b01cad7fd$2da47210$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <20100410132250.GB25515@alinoe.com> If the beta grid (Aditi) does not demand one to accept the TOS before being able to login, then this is by far the best solution I've heard so far. Can someone confirm that logging into the beta grid does NOT ask one to agree with the new TOS? On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 11:50:24PM +0800, Boy Lane wrote: > The Betagrid would be such an option, and I assume all involved developers > have accounts old enough to be in the database. -- Carlo Wood From aleric.inglewood at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 06:33:21 2010 From: aleric.inglewood at gmail.com (Aleric Inglewood) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:33:21 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: +100 Aleric Inglewood This seems to coincide with my remarks added to https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Robin_Cornelius/tvp_mods where I point out that the mixture of developer and user just doesn't work (if only because it requires a *different* definition of "Third-Pary Viewer"). However, my conclusion is that it makes no sense to refer to "Developer" at all. On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Nicholaz Beresford wrote: > I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of > suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a > meeting anyway). > > First of all, I believe the current TPV is broken beyond repair. The > main reason is that responsibilities for users, developers and viewer > dictionary are mixed into a mess and that many burdens/agreements which > IMO belong in the category of preferred partners (viewer directory) are > mushed into other sections. I'm sure it's confusing to the users and > it's obvious (by previous discussion here) that it's confusing for > developers. > > Below is a way to structure the TPV which I would have found acceptable > (fleshed out details nonwithstanding): > > 1) Explain what an acceptable TPV is and keep it to the core concerns: > - protection of copyright (blatant violations of permissions) > - protection of user accounts (passwords, etc.) > - protection of the service in general (viewer crashing, server load, etc.) > > 2) Make a section which applies to users (anyone who uses a TPV to > connect to SL) and leverage your main goals through that: > - prohibit use of viewers which violate the concerns under 1) > - reserve the right to block access by such viewers > - reserve the right to request stopping use of those and eventually to > ban accounts using such viewers > - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when > using a TPV > - instruct users that is their responsibility to do their DD when > choosing a TPV and that they have to deal with the outcome > - instruct users how to look for acceptable viewers (points listed below > under 3) and recommend usage of viewers from 4) > > 3) Make a section for other viewer developers in general and keep > requests/agreements to a bare minimum and easy to comply with > - explain that if developer uses his/her viewer to connect to SL, he/she > is also a user under 2) > - in addition request the following > - visible disclaimer about non affiliation with LL > - visible notice to end users that usage being governed by the TPV policy > - visible notice about account and privacy protection > - visible notice about support (i.e. non-support by LL) > - make it plain and simple and refrain from requesting a card blanche > for broad and/or future demands (the whole TOS is transferable, and even > if a developer would trust LL's good intentions, a potential buyer of LL > may not be seen to have those). (See the middle part of the blog post > from the Imprudence folks, these were mainly my concerns too: > > http://imprudenceviewer.org/2010/03/26/an-important-announcement-regarding-the-third-party-viewer-policy/ > ) > > 4) Make a section for the viewer directory. Put the more far reaching > requests into that for those who want to be listed there in order to > gain exposure > - naming conventions beyond the existing trademark policies > - promise of adjustment/removal of features and other nice (for LL) to > have cooperation > - whatever else beyond 3) may be on LL's wishlist > > > These are just from the top of my head and obviously I'm merely speaking > for myself only and from the armchair in the off even. > > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/f772f837/attachment-0001.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 10 06:45:34 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 15:45:34 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> You know, this would actually make me feel better if you were a lawyer. Even more so, if you were a Linden Lab lawyer. But since (I assume) neither is the case, this is just your interpretation and I see it differently. On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 04:19:00AM +0200, Dirk Moerenhout wrote: > > If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW > > features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would > > be more clear. > > That will create a false sense of safety. When LL removes code from > the source tree for legal reasons you'd make a TPV developer believe > that he's not liable for that code if he keeps on distributing it (as > you just made him believe he's only responsible for what > developed/added himself). Yet when he has been informed that the code > can not be legally distributed willful continued distribution is an > issue and may see him ending up in court. Off course he should know > this if he reads and understands the GPL. The GPL clearly demonstrates > responsibility for distribution in section 7. > > > The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute". ?The GNU GPL > > license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further > > restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." > > (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No > > Warranty > > paragraphs 11 and 12. ?Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, > > risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL. > > No it should not. For starters you do not quote it in full. It > actually says "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any > Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute. Linden Lab > shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers." > Punctuation is used for readability but doesn't remove the second > sentence from the context. This is LL waving responsibility more than > it is about who it transfers to. If you consider section 11 and 12 of > the GPL this is a reiteration of "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY > AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE > DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR > CORRECTION.". Note that LL did not restrict you from passing the risks > on to the users of your TPV (they actually imply it transfers to them > already). > > Granted. In the TPVP, like most similar legal documents, they have > reiterated quite a few points that are covered already for example by > the GPL or the TOS. But as I stated before I still need to see the > first sensible example of how this affects somebody beyond what they > should expect regardless of the TPVP. > > Dirk > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Carlo Wood From boy.lane at yahoo.com Sat Apr 10 07:16:34 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 22:16:34 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBF4829.9020100@lindenlab.com> <001b01cad7fd$2da47210$6401a8c0@hp> <20100410132250.GB25515@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <001801cad8b8$6ee47b10$6401a8c0@hp> Yes, the betagrid does not require to clickwrap the new ToS/TPV, for the simple reason it is a months old snapshot of SL. It would suit the purpose of having an open and constructive discussion just fine, without forcing anyone to accept TPV in the first place. You may also want to read what Tateru wrote in this regards. The short form: https://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/2010-April/001633.html Boy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carlo Wood" To: "Boy Lane" Cc: "Joe Miller" ; Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 9:22 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV > If the beta grid (Aditi) does not demand one to accept the TOS > before being able to login, then this is by far the best solution > I've heard so far. > > Can someone confirm that logging into the beta grid does NOT > ask one to agree with the new TOS? > > On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 11:50:24PM +0800, Boy Lane wrote: >> The Betagrid would be such an option, and I assume all involved >> developers >> have accounts old enough to be in the database. > > -- > Carlo Wood From tateru.nino at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 07:43:44 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:43:44 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> Message-ID: <4BC08EA0.2070703@weblogsinc.com> If you're a developer who is also a user, it'd really be a second-party viewer wouldn't it? Technically, isn't the distinction actually between a viewer /distributor/ (one who makes source code and/or binaries available to others, whether or not they're /modifying it/) and a user (someone who uses such a thing to log in, whether or not they actually compile it themselves)? Not that the Lab actually needs anything resembling the TPVP to successfully take legal action against someone making pernicious viewers available or creating them for their own use. On 10/04/2010 11:33 PM, Aleric Inglewood wrote: > +100 > > Aleric Inglewood > > This seems to coincide with my remarks added to > https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/User:Robin_Cornelius/tvp_mods > where I point out that the mixture of developer and user just > doesn't work (if only because it requires a /different/ definition > of "Third-Pary Viewer"). However, my conclusion is that it > makes no sense to refer to "Developer" at all. > > On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Nicholaz Beresford > wrote: > > I won't attend the meeting, but here are a few pennies worth of > suggestions (they would be too detailed and complex to convey in a > meeting anyway). > > First of all, I believe the current TPV is broken beyond repair. The > main reason is that responsibilities for users, developers and viewer > dictionary are mixed into a mess and that many burdens/agreements > which > IMO belong in the category of preferred partners (viewer > directory) are > mushed into other sections. I'm sure it's confusing to the users and > it's obvious (by previous discussion here) that it's confusing for > developers. > > Below is a way to structure the TPV which I would have found > acceptable > (fleshed out details nonwithstanding): > > 1) Explain what an acceptable TPV is and keep it to the core concerns: > - protection of copyright (blatant violations of permissions) > - protection of user accounts (passwords, etc.) > - protection of the service in general (viewer crashing, server > load, etc.) > > 2) Make a section which applies to users (anyone who uses a TPV to > connect to SL) and leverage your main goals through that: > - prohibit use of viewers which violate the concerns under 1) > - reserve the right to block access by such viewers > - reserve the right to request stopping use of those and eventually to > ban accounts using such viewers > - instruct that there is no end user support for problems arising when > using a TPV > - instruct users that is their responsibility to do their DD when > choosing a TPV and that they have to deal with the outcome > - instruct users how to look for acceptable viewers (points listed > below > under 3) and recommend usage of viewers from 4) > > 3) Make a section for other viewer developers in general and keep > requests/agreements to a bare minimum and easy to comply with > - explain that if developer uses his/her viewer to connect to SL, > he/she > is also a user under 2) > - in addition request the following > - visible disclaimer about non affiliation with LL > - visible notice to end users that usage being governed by the > TPV policy > - visible notice about account and privacy protection > - visible notice about support (i.e. non-support by LL) > - make it plain and simple and refrain from requesting a card blanche > for broad and/or future demands (the whole TOS is transferable, > and even > if a developer would trust LL's good intentions, a potential buyer > of LL > may not be seen to have those). (See the middle part of the blog post > from the Imprudence folks, these were mainly my concerns too: > http://imprudenceviewer.org/2010/03/26/an-important-announcement-regarding-the-third-party-viewer-policy/) > > 4) Make a section for the viewer directory. Put the more far reaching > requests into that for those who want to be listed there in order to > gain exposure > - naming conventions beyond the existing trademark policies > - promise of adjustment/removal of features and other nice (for > LL) to > have cooperation > - whatever else beyond 3) may be on LL's wishlist > > > These are just from the top of my head and obviously I'm merely > speaking > for myself only and from the armchair in the off even. > > > 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 -- Tateru Nino Contributing Editor http://massively.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100411/3a3f458d/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 07:46:07 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 00:46:07 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BC08F2F.5050001@gmail.com> Curious. How many of us got professional legal advice? I did. I know a couple of you that did likewise. I'd be interested in knowing how many others. (There'd be no need to clutter things with negative answers - and it might be more appropriate to reply offlist - since the question is a work-related one for me). On 10/04/2010 11:45 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > You know, this would actually make me feel better if you were a lawyer. > Even more so, if you were a Linden Lab lawyer. But since (I assume) neither > is the case, this is just your interpretation and I see it differently. > > On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 04:19:00AM +0200, Dirk Moerenhout wrote: > >>> If the first one was re-written to say "you are responsible for all NEW >>> features etc that you ADDED to make a Third-Party Viewer, etc" it would >>> be more clear. >>> >> That will create a false sense of safety. When LL removes code from >> the source tree for legal reasons you'd make a TPV developer believe >> that he's not liable for that code if he keeps on distributing it (as >> you just made him believe he's only responsible for what >> developed/added himself). Yet when he has been informed that the code >> can not be legally distributed willful continued distribution is an >> issue and may see him ending up in court. Off course he should know >> this if he reads and understands the GPL. The GPL clearly demonstrates >> responsibility for distribution in section 7. >> >> >>> The second one should simply drop "develop or distribute". The GNU GPL >>> license on LL own page states "6. ...You may not impose any further >>> restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." >>> (in this case, "you" being Linden Research), and further includes the No >>> Warranty >>> paragraphs 11 and 12. Therefore any attempt to impose responsibility, >>> risks, expenses, etc on a developer appear to conflict with the GPL. >>> >> No it should not. For starters you do not quote it in full. It >> actually says "You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any >> Third-Party Viewers that you use, develop, or distribute. Linden Lab >> shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers." >> Punctuation is used for readability but doesn't remove the second >> sentence from the context. This is LL waving responsibility more than >> it is about who it transfers to. If you consider section 11 and 12 of >> the GPL this is a reiteration of "THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY >> AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE >> DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR >> CORRECTION.". Note that LL did not restrict you from passing the risks >> on to the users of your TPV (they actually imply it transfers to them >> already). >> >> Granted. In the TPVP, like most similar legal documents, they have >> reiterated quite a few points that are covered already for example by >> the GPL or the TOS. But as I stated before I still need to see the >> first sensible example of how this affects somebody beyond what they >> should expect regardless of the TPVP. >> >> Dirk >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From danielravennest at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 08:00:17 2010 From: danielravennest at gmail.com (Daniel) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:00:17 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BC09281.5000204@gmail.com> The very fact that reasonably intelligent people here on this list, which are part of the community the TPV is aimed at, cannot agree what it means, is cause to rewrite it for more clarity. Carlo Wood wrote: > You know, this would actually make me feel better if you were a lawyer. > Even more so, if you were a Linden Lab lawyer. But since (I assume) neither > is the case, this is just your interpretation and I see it differently. > > > From gareth at garethnelson.com Sat Apr 10 08:06:43 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 16:06:43 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: <4BC08EA0.2070703@weblogsinc.com> References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> <4BC08EA0.2070703@weblogsinc.com> Message-ID: > Not that the Lab actually needs anything resembling the TPVP to successfully > take legal action against someone making pernicious viewers available or > creating them for their own use. I can use telnet to break into various TCP-based servers, does that make the authors of my telnet client liable for my actions? I can also (and have done so as part of a few penetration tests) use the metasploit framework to break into various machines - are the authors of metasploit liable for my actions? Unless there's some precedent to the contrary, it would seem that the user remains liable and not the developer of the tools From joel.foner at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 08:16:07 2010 From: joel.foner at gmail.com (Joel Foner) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:16:07 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> <4BC08EA0.2070703@weblogsinc.com> Message-ID: Sometimes it's useful to take a large parallel jump as a way of exploring an issue. This one just hit me as a direct parallel (riffing on Gareth's idea below): Is it possible to hold a web browser manufacturer responsible as a tool to breach security and steal credit card numbers, perform denial of service attacks and infiltrate secure systems? It would be amusing to see someone take legal action against Google for the fact that Chrome enabled an attacker to penetrate a Google internal system someday. Maybe I need coffee before thinking about this stuff! Joel On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 11:06 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > > Not that the Lab actually needs anything resembling the TPVP to > successfully > > take legal action against someone making pernicious viewers available or > > creating them for their own use. > > I can use telnet to break into various TCP-based servers, does that > make the authors of my telnet client liable for my actions? > > Joel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/42fa8f3e/attachment.htm From joel.foner at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 08:19:14 2010 From: joel.foner at gmail.com (Joel Foner) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 11:19:14 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 40 In-Reply-To: <4BC09281.5000204@gmail.com> References: <4BBFC6A0.3070305@gmail.com> <20100410134534.GC25515@alinoe.com> <4BC09281.5000204@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 11:00 AM, Daniel wrote: > The very fact that reasonably intelligent people here on this list, > which are part of the community the TPV is aimed at, cannot agree what > it means, is cause to rewrite it for more clarity. > > Carlo Wood wrote: > > You know, this would actually make me feel better if you were a lawyer. > > Even more so, if you were a Linden Lab lawyer. But since (I assume) > neither > > is the case, this is just your interpretation and I see it differently. > Legal interpretation is the only one that matters for a legal document, and at the same time, it is sometimes possible to reframe a legal document to make more sense to a casual reader in areas that are intuitively unclear. Asking for legal language changes without being a lawyer or consulting with one is on the dangerous end of the spectrum... to that old saw "be careful what you ask for." Joel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/668ece1d/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 08:27:15 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 01:27:15 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Stuff from my Lunch Bag In-Reply-To: References: <4BBF7D61.3020005@blueflash.cc> <4BC08EA0.2070703@weblogsinc.com> Message-ID: <4BC098D3.5000109@gmail.com> On 11/04/2010 1:06 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> Not that the Lab actually needs anything resembling the TPVP to successfully >> take legal action against someone making pernicious viewers available or >> creating them for their own use. >> > I can use telnet to break into various TCP-based servers, does that > make the authors of my telnet client liable for my actions? > > I can also (and have done so as part of a few penetration tests) use > the metasploit framework to break into various machines - are the > authors of metasploit liable for my actions? > > > Unless there's some precedent to the contrary, it would seem that the > user remains liable and not the developer of the tools > It's a matter of intent. Some things are not actionable unless there was intent to cause loss or damage. Intent's something you need to prove in a court. Obviously, the developers of telnet clients - as a rule - do not intend for them to cause harm. The law revolves around the punishment of those who make /choices /that lead to damage, but that gets a bit hazy. Certain kinds of negligence can be considered a choice, and so on. Tort law is rich and baroque. -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100411/4d69d1de/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 10:14:18 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:14:18 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <4BBF5116.5050203@lindenlab.com> References: <4BBF5116.5050203@lindenlab.com> Message-ID: <4BC0B1EA.5020807@gmail.com> Hi Joe, In case I don't make the Brown Bag, I just wanted to point out the fact that simply developers, which includes how Linden Lab has invested resources to sustain such world, don't share a view with users that Virtual Reality that Virtual Reality is not just a game. This realization is actually desired despite the politics of how we all move from what has been said virtual is not really virtual. I won't digress here about the subject, yet the monitor in front of us we can't touch and see and that is not 'fake' as some people treat virtual to only mean. I even imagine a house size 'monitor' where every wall can act as an interactive colorful display that consists of many organized liquid crystal units spread on like paint. That's the future... for now we have e-paper. It's something we can't really just say is not possible anymore, and it is something that may affect how we see content (or broken content) in relation to policies like the TPV. I gather from the TPV that is it intended to help prevent broken content, yet it has been easily attacked. I think the notion of how to deal with broken content gets lost when developers worry more about how to protect their liabilities. Developers simply want to say 'use at your own risk' from a software development standpoint, yet that doesn't give anything to help ensure content doesn't break. With that in mind, any word that implies 'responsibility' somehow hasn't carried the concern about how to prevent content breakage when anybody connects to SL Grid.I'm sure we don't want to paint our houses with a 'use at your own risk' and expect to say it is baby-safe. What would a baby see if an accidental bump in the wall activated something that parents would consider an undesirable experience for baby or child. I can only imagine the horror if the scene of the wall suddenly changed to spook the baby as if monsters came out of the wall. Maybe this isn't quite broken content, yet it is still an ideal situation to mention to level where 'responsibility' is distinct from 'liabilities'. Just something to think about.... Joe Miller wrote: > Morgaine, > > Thanks for asking. My interest is to listen to specific concerns > voiced by the majority of the community *and* (more importantly) take > */proposed solutions/* to those concerns under advisement before the > policy becomes effective on April 30. It won't be very productive for > anyone if it's just a grousing session about legal theory or > hypothetical situations that may or may not occur in the future. Yes, > I will take all serious proposals back into the company for serious > consideration. But, make no mistake, I'm not asking for a change set > that makes one person happier at a time. I'm looking for the minimum > change set that represents the broadest possible consensus among the > community of TPV authors. > > So, yours are good questions, and I do intend to champion the TPV > community's collective voice in this process. I hope we emerge with > something actionable out of these meetings. > > -- Joe > From marinekelley at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 10:15:47 2010 From: marinekelley at gmail.com (Marine Kelley) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 19:15:47 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Thank you Joe I'd like to chime in and bring my own concerns since I won't make it to the meeting. My primary concern is about the Viewer Directory and here are my questions : - Will registering a TPV to the Viewer Directory become mandatory one day ? If so, how can we be absolutely certain that our RL names and info won't suddenly appear in clear on the webpage without our prior consent, even after registering ? - Why the need for RL info at all since LL already knows how to join us in case of a problem ? Why do we have to enter these data again ? - There is no privacy policy on this particular webpage, it is just said that LL "may" make them available. I'd like to point out that this is strictly illegal in most countries (especially in Europe), LL needs our explicit written agreement prior to publishing our data. Registering to a webpage with a "may" or "may not" is not a written agreement. Thank you, Marine On 8 April 2010 22:24, Joe Linden wrote: > Hello, all. I've been reading the ongoing commentary here, on various > blogs, irc, and in-world groups about the recently introduced Third Party > Viewer Policy and Directory and I'd like to host an "office hour" or > informal brown bag to make the conversation a little more synchronous for > those who are interested. I plan to hold three of these over the next > couple of weeks, at times that might be friendlier for some than others, but > the first one will happen next Tuesday, 4/13 at noon PDT. I'd like to > address questions about the intent of the policy, how we will be using the > Directory going forward, and see if I can gather the specific concerns that > have been raised by the community over the past several weeks. It'll be an > informal Q&A session, held in voice, at this location: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > No RSVP needed, and feel free to rebroadcast the invite to others you think > would benefit from open dialog around the subject. > > I hope to see many of you there next week. > > -- 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100410/65ce03cd/attachment.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 10:25:43 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 14:25:43 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <4BC0B1EA.5020807@gmail.com> References: <4BBF5116.5050203@lindenlab.com> <4BC0B1EA.5020807@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC0B497.8070004@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 a baby can still crawl over the TV remote and turn it on right when a horror movie is playing, that baby analogy didn't quite work On 10/4/2010 14:14, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > Hi Joe, > > In case I don't make the Brown Bag, I just wanted to point out the fact > that simply developers, which includes how Linden Lab has invested > resources to sustain such world, don't share a view with users that > Virtual Reality that Virtual Reality is not just a game. This > realization is actually desired despite the politics of how we all move > from what has been said virtual is not really virtual. I won't digress > here about the subject, yet the monitor in front of us we can't touch > and see and that is not 'fake' as some people treat virtual to only > mean. I even imagine a house size 'monitor' where every wall can act as > an interactive colorful display that consists of many organized liquid > crystal units spread on like paint. That's the future... for now we have > e-paper. It's something we can't really just say is not possible > anymore, and it is something that may affect how we see content (or > broken content) in relation to policies like the TPV. > > I gather from the TPV that is it intended to help prevent broken > content, yet it has been easily attacked. I think the notion of how to > deal with broken content gets lost when developers worry more about how > to protect their liabilities. Developers simply want to say 'use at your > own risk' from a software development standpoint, yet that doesn't give > anything to help ensure content doesn't break. > > With that in mind, any word that implies 'responsibility' somehow hasn't > carried the concern about how to prevent content breakage when anybody > connects to SL Grid.I'm sure we don't want to paint our houses with a > 'use at your own risk' and expect to say it is baby-safe. What would a > baby see if an accidental bump in the wall activated something that > parents would consider an undesirable experience for baby or child. I > can only imagine the horror if the scene of the wall suddenly changed to > spook the baby as if monsters came out of the wall. Maybe this isn't > quite broken content, yet it is still an ideal situation to mention to > level where 'responsibility' is distinct from 'liabilities'. > > Just something to think about.... > > > Joe Miller wrote: >> Morgaine, >> >> Thanks for asking. My interest is to listen to specific concerns >> voiced by the majority of the community *and* (more importantly) take >> */proposed solutions/* to those concerns under advisement before the >> policy becomes effective on April 30. It won't be very productive for >> anyone if it's just a grousing session about legal theory or >> hypothetical situations that may or may not occur in the future. Yes, >> I will take all serious proposals back into the company for serious >> consideration. But, make no mistake, I'm not asking for a change set >> that makes one person happier at a time. I'm looking for the minimum >> change set that represents the broadest possible consensus among the >> community of TPV authors. >> >> So, yours are good questions, and I do intend to champion the TPV >> community's collective voice in this process. I hope we emerge with >> something actionable out of these meetings. >> >> -- 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvAtJMACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmV8rACfWziTD7lXwmEONUMwduAzzZ+X UwIAnjdlpsmXYRWd1Lur9gHpt5CQoEDC =ozxl -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dzonatas at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 10:51:41 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 10:51:41 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV next Tuesday (4/13) In-Reply-To: <4BC0B497.8070004@Gmail.com> References: <4BBF5116.5050203@lindenlab.com> <4BC0B1EA.5020807@gmail.com> <4BC0B497.8070004@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC0BAAD.80402@gmail.com> I'm not sure what you mean it didn't quite work. Anyways, I appreciate that Joe wants to gather this Brown-Bag, so we can talk specifics in words. Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > a baby can still crawl over the TV remote and turn it on right when a > horror movie is playing, that baby analogy didn't quite work > > On 10/4/2010 14:14, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> Hi Joe, >> >> In case I don't make the Brown Bag, I just wanted to point out the fact >> that simply developers, which includes how Linden Lab has invested >> resources to sustain such world, don't share a view with users that >> Virtual Reality that Virtual Reality is not just a game. This >> realization is actually desired despite the politics of how we all move >> from what has been said virtual is not really virtual. I won't digress >> here about the subject, yet the monitor in front of us we can't touch >> and see and that is not 'fake' as some people treat virtual to only >> mean. I even imagine a house size 'monitor' where every wall can act as >> an interactive colorful display that consists of many organized liquid >> crystal units spread on like paint. That's the future... for now we have >> e-paper. It's something we can't really just say is not possible >> anymore, and it is something that may affect how we see content (or >> broken content) in relation to policies like the TPV. >> >> I gather from the TPV that is it intended to help prevent broken >> content, yet it has been easily attacked. I think the notion of how to >> deal with broken content gets lost when developers worry more about how >> to protect their liabilities. Developers simply want to say 'use at your >> own risk' from a software development standpoint, yet that doesn't give >> anything to help ensure content doesn't break. >> >> With that in mind, any word that implies 'responsibility' somehow hasn't >> carried the concern about how to prevent content breakage when anybody >> connects to SL Grid.I'm sure we don't want to paint our houses with a >> 'use at your own risk' and expect to say it is baby-safe. What would a >> baby see if an accidental bump in the wall activated something that >> parents would consider an undesirable experience for baby or child. I >> can only imagine the horror if the scene of the wall suddenly changed to >> spook the baby as if monsters came out of the wall. Maybe this isn't >> quite broken content, yet it is still an ideal situation to mention to >> level where 'responsibility' is distinct from 'liabilities'. >> >> Just something to think about.... >> >> >> Joe Miller wrote: >> >>> Morgaine, >>> >>> Thanks for asking. My interest is to listen to specific concerns >>> voiced by the majority of the community *and* (more importantly) take >>> */proposed solutions/* to those concerns under advisement before the >>> policy becomes effective on April 30. It won't be very productive for >>> anyone if it's just a grousing session about legal theory or >>> hypothetical situations that may or may not occur in the future. Yes, >>> I will take all serious proposals back into the company for serious >>> consideration. But, make no mistake, I'm not asking for a change set >>> that makes one person happier at a time. I'm looking for the minimum >>> change set that represents the broadest possible consensus among the >>> community of TPV authors. >>> >>> So, yours are good questions, and I do intend to champion the TPV >>> community's collective voice in this process. I hope we emerge with >>> something actionable out of these meetings. >>> >>> -- 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 >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvAtJMACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmV8rACfWziTD7lXwmEONUMwduAzzZ+X > UwIAnjdlpsmXYRWd1Lur9gHpt5CQoEDC > =ozxl > -----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 > > From aklo at skyhighway.com Sat Apr 10 12:53:51 2010 From: aklo at skyhighway.com (aklo at skyhighway.com) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 12:53:51 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] TPVP Discussion Message-ID: i've been watching this TPVP discussion go round 'n round since it got started and just biting my tongue 'cause i don't "have a dog in the race," as they say. That doesn't mean i haven't had an opinion i've wanted to share, though. So, if you don't mind, i'd like to make a respectful submission, please? Despite some awfully emotional claims to the contrary, i don't think LL has any intention of hunting developers down and sucking the marrow from their bones! Really, there's little point unless somebody deliberately causes problems, which i think is what most of us agree is the intent? Well, that and the need for LL to deal with pressure from people who can legally claim they've been ripped off or whatever and that LL has some responsibility to "pay for it." If somebody makes a viewer (or any other product) with the idea of exploiting SL, harming the residents, and reducing the fun and utility of the site for others, then they deserve whatever grief they get for it! Do we disagree on that point? Surely not? i think that no reasonable person would want to excuse somebody who deliberately developed malignant software and gave it to others to use even if they never used it that way themselves (or at all), or even if they never advertised its evil capabilities, relying instead on malevolent users to discover them. i mean, proving anything in some of those cases would really be a challenge, but that's not the point. The point is, SL is like, big and juicy enough that it's already a target. Because i *like* SL and want it to succeed, i even hope that it gets even bigger, juicier, and that a bunch of you share my enthusiasm! Maybe the issue is just how far into the trade off between security and freedom we want to get, especially realizing that both are really il Once i had a famous lawyer who had argued several cases before the US Supreme Court explain to me that i needed to be aware that the state of law in the United States - and most other places - was written so that those promoting and enforcing it could theoretically arrest anyone, anytime for *something*, and even make it stick - *provided their interest and resources exceeded the abilities of the accused and their supporters to complain about it.* Like, obviously, right? LL is invoking the law. i think that's kinda sad, but i can't say that it's not inevitable. It's the kind of world we've allowed to develop. We have to live with that in so many ways! My background includes a long time spent working for everyone's favorite company, SCO. It was a great place at first! Really, i admit the reason why i was so attracted to it in the beginning was 'cause the company hottub was a big part of SCO's culture - actually, right in the middle of the building where all the engineers worked! There was also all the free beer. Many Mondays there'd be the remains of the weekend's keg in some breakroom for breakfast chasers or whatever. As far as i was concerned, any place that was gonna provide a bubbling tub full of people so comfortable with each other they could be naked together and complimentary alcohol as part of the compensation package was my kind of place! i do hope you understand? FYI, there really was once a memo from SCO's CEO asking everyone to please wear some kind of clothing in the work areas of the building during business hours. It was due to the "surprise" expressed by a sortie of suits from IBM (how ironic is that?) one day to see just exactly what it was they were being asked to invest in. As we know, mismanagement by the investors that eventually bought SCO pulled it in other directions. As tragic as the mismanagement was, and despite what some may say, i talked in person like to enough of the people who reviewed the relevant code - in some cases its authors, people i knew personally, friends, to know that SCO really was ripped off by people whose concerns were not so much promoting open source as the personal compensation packages they were intent on cultivating by (for eample) leveraging free labor in the open source community. There, i said it. i don't know any of the people reading this message at all, really. i think i like some of you - i know i like LL (a lot) and that i'm an avid supporter of its employees, even though i don't know them, either. As far as i'm concerned, LL's people are developing an amazing tool with incredible potential! Well, we all are in our own ways. i'm just willing to go a little farther and support the idea that the Lindens are well-intentioned, intelligent, and deserve the benefit of a doubt. Unlike SCO & the argument it got into with IBM, and then Novell, i don't think the possibility of a $6 billion argument exists here. i'm not sure what everyone is afraid of? Where are the deep pockets that are going to try and throw someone in jail, or suck them so dry they end up on a street corner with a "Please Help" sign? And what are the chances that kind of thing would happen, anyway, unless the target had some real problem that needed attention, anyhow? If there was some way to do it, i would happily offer to sign all the responsibility for all the decent people i've heard on this list so that they could get back to work doing the things that they enjoy most so that all this legalistic frustration could disappear from the conversation. A long time ago when i arrived in the city where i live now i had no friends, almost no money, and no where to stay. My first few weeks included lots of dumpster dinners and camping. i mean, let whoever sue *me*! The risks are worth it! i'd just like to see peace here, the distracting noise go away, and the roadblocks to the flow of rad technology removed. Please accept my apologies for the interruption, and my thanks for your time. From dale at daleglass.net Sat Apr 10 14:16:23 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 01:16:23 +0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPVP Discussion In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <201004110116.23526.dale@daleglass.net> ? ????????? ?? ??????? 10 ?????? 2010 23:53:51 ????? aklo at skyhighway.com ???????: > Despite some awfully emotional claims to the contrary, i don't think LL > has any intention of hunting developers down and sucking the marrow from > their bones! Really, there's little point unless somebody deliberately > causes problems, which i think is what most of us agree is the intent? > Well, that and the need for LL to deal with pressure from people who can > legally claim they've been ripped off or whatever and that LL has some > responsibility to "pay for it." Whatever LL's intention is, doesn't matter. What matters is only what the agreement says. Never agree to anything on the basis of vague promises like "we'd never use it that way", or "that's just the standard boilerplate". > If somebody makes a viewer (or any other product) with the idea of > exploiting SL, harming the residents, and reducing the fun and utility of > the site for others, then they deserve whatever grief they get for it! Do > we disagree on that point? Surely not? A problem exists with the way quite a lot of things can be used for different purposes. For instance, export functionality can be used for both legitimate purposes and copyright infringement. The worry is that somebody will find an unintended use for something I implement and that I'll have to deal with the consequences. > LL is invoking the law. i think that's kinda sad, but i can't say that > it's not inevitable. It's the kind of world we've allowed to develop. We > have to live with that in so many ways! Precisely. And that's exactly why people are trying to stop it from developing any further in the wrong direction. > As we know, mismanagement by the investors that eventually bought SCO > pulled it in other directions. As tragic as the mismanagement was, and > despite what some may say, i talked in person like to enough of the people > who reviewed the relevant code - in some cases its authors, people i knew > personally, friends, to know that SCO really was ripped off by people > whose concerns were not so much promoting open source as the personal > compensation packages they were intent on cultivating by (for eample) > leveraging free labor in the open source community. There, i said it. This is veering off-topic, but I do not believe it. There was never any evidence of any SCO code ending up in Linux. The expert SCO hired said there wasn't any, even. To my knowledge in the current legal cases, this isn't being considered at all anymore. > i don't know any of the people reading this message at all, really. i > think i like some of you - i know i like LL (a lot) and that i'm an avid > supporter of its employees, even though i don't know them, either. As far > as i'm concerned, LL's people are developing an amazing tool with > incredible potential! Well, we all are in our own ways. i'm just willing > to go a little farther and support the idea that the Lindens are > well-intentioned, intelligent, and deserve the benefit of a doubt. LL as a company and as a group of people are entirely different things to me. I really like some of the people working there, but that has nothing to do with whether I agree or disagree with its policies. > Unlike SCO & the argument it got into with IBM, and then Novell, i don't > think the possibility of a $6 billion argument exists here. i'm not sure > what everyone is afraid of? Where are the deep pockets that are going to > try and throw someone in jail, or suck them so dry they end up on a street > corner with a "Please Help" sign? LL's pockets are plenty deep for the average person. And as SCO proved, you don't have to be all that big to cause a lot of trouble, if you're creative enough. > And what are the chances that kind of > thing would happen, anyway, unless the target had some real problem that > needed attention, anyhow? Any chances are too much, period. I do not agree to things on the basis of "we'll never use it for that, promise!". It needs to be explicitly spelled out in the legal agreement. > If there was some way to do it, i would happily offer to sign all the > responsibility for all the decent people i've heard on this list so that > they could get back to work doing the things that they enjoy most so that > all this legalistic frustration could disappear from the conversation. And they are, from what I hear a lot of people will get back to work, just by cutting LL out of the equation, and switching to work with alternate grids. From lillie.yiyuan at gmail.com Sat Apr 10 18:27:32 2010 From: lillie.yiyuan at gmail.com (Lillian Yiyuan) Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 18:27:32 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV In-Reply-To: <001801cad8b8$6ee47b10$6401a8c0@hp> References: <000901cad78c$f2eb2350$6401a8c0@hp> <001e01cad7b8$e69e2a80$6401a8c0@hp> <4BBF4829.9020100@lindenlab.com> <001b01cad7fd$2da47210$6401a8c0@hp> <20100410132250.GB25515@alinoe.com> <001801cad8b8$6ee47b10$6401a8c0@hp> Message-ID: I think Boy Lane's beta suggestion is excellent, because it will also reduce the possibility of other problems with the meeting. On Sat, Apr 10, 2010 at 7:16 AM, Boy Lane wrote: > Yes, the betagrid does not require to clickwrap the new ToS/TPV, for the > simple > reason it is a months old snapshot of SL. It would suit the purpose of > having an > open and constructive discussion just fine, without forcing anyone to accept > TPV > in the first place. > > You may als From aklo at skyhighway.com Sun Apr 11 12:00:01 2010 From: aklo at skyhighway.com (aklo at skyhighway.com) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Two Worlds Message-ID: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> Hey Y'all, maybe i had an idea... There's been a lotta "comment" on the new viewer 2.0 look 'n feel stuff. Some ppl love it! Others hate it! Whatever it is, i think it's been a sorta polarizing issue, huh? One thing, the official claim is that it tests well with noobs. Some say that's 'cause they don't know any better or that it's more like what they're used to with whatever else they do on the Internet or just plain whatever. Maybe it's just that yet another aspect of VW technology has been revealed that hadn't been noticed or anticipated so much before? What if there were two modes to the viewer? That's been suggested already, i know. What i don't think has been suggested is putting it in the context of two (maybe more) different kinds of users, and i don't mean something dumb like noobs and oldbies! i think maybe it's the diff between ppl who are more rp focused and ppl who are more business or professional focused? Y'know, some ppl don't want a whole virtual world so much as a tool to get some project done, or for some special purpose where a whole VW is a distraction but the background & context the capability provides is still important? Like, i'll be straight up and say that for me, i like a lot about viewer 2.0! But, i so totally *hate* that sidebar bashing into me like someone with a sharp elbow on the bus, or the disappeared floaters and windows i can't see through anymore! The annoying things make it hard to focus on the things i like lots of times. For me, it would be super cool if the viewer had a "mode switch"! A selection i could make to go back and forth from "RP Mode" or "VW Mode" with immersion optimised to "Professional Mode" or "Utility Mode" where the VW was more like just another screen or window that had something interesting going on in it? A third mode might even be something sorta halfway in between & made really simple with lots of help for noobs so the learning curve wasn't so steep, perilous, or confusing. :-P For the Big Picture SL presentation i can see something like all the SL windows, including all the chat, inventory, group, etc - everything (even HUDs?), being just windows for the OS with the VW its own window that maybe is maximized and maybe isn't. In maximized mode the VW window could have the ability to "draw in" or spawn inside without "leaving" the VW any or all of the windows for chat, inventory, etc in their floaty, sometimes transparent mode like the Terminator's heads up display that so many like so well! Y'know, the best of all worlds? It's just an idea. i haven't compiled & mod'ed the viewers yet, so i don't know how much work it would be to do all that. Maybe an unrealistically, impossible too much. Anyway, have a great day!! Oh, BTW, if you feel like answering this msg or making a comment or whatever, pls, pretty pls don't drag the TPVP argument into it? 'K? i mean, yeah, it's important and all, but this isn't that conversation? From danielravennest at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 12:58:06 2010 From: danielravennest at gmail.com (Daniel) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 14:58:06 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] opensource-dev Digest, Vol 3, Issue 46 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC229CE.2030004@gmail.com> In effect I have that now by having 5 different viewers installed (1.23, Snowglobe, Emerald, Kirsten S19, and S20) The mode switch is log out and log in with a different viewer. It would be nice if one viewer satisfied everyone, and had all the features and UI options that everyone wanted, but that is probably not possible, not to mention new features that are still experimental. Hence the multiple viewer versions we have now. > Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 12:00:01 -0700 (PDT) > From: aklo at skyhighway.com > > > For me, it would be super cool if the viewer had a "mode switch"! A > selection i could make to go back and forth from "RP Mode" or "VW Mode" > with immersion optimised to "Professional Mode" or "Utility Mode" where > the VW was more like just another screen or window that had something > interesting going on in it? A third mode might even be something sorta > halfway in between & made really simple with lots of help for noobs so the > learning curve wasn't so steep, perilous, or confusing. :-P > From stickman at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 14:13:52 2010 From: stickman at gmail.com (Stickman) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 14:13:52 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Two Worlds In-Reply-To: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 12:00 PM, wrote: > Hey Y'all, maybe i had an idea... Ideas are awesome. Thanks for sharing. > There's been a lotta "comment" on the new viewer 2.0 look 'n feel stuff. > What if there were two modes to the viewer? As I understand it, one of the reasons Viewer 2.0 is a complete UI redesign is that the old one was a pain to maintain. The new one is designed to be more easily maintained. Someone feel free to shout if I'm wrong. Some have requested the 1.23 viewer be kept as an option (I think Maya was the voice on that), kinda like how it was done with the whole Dazzle freakout. Done like that, having "two modes" would defeat the above purpose. So it depends on what you mean, exactly. My idea of "two modes" I've been telling people about is the "consumer" versus the "creator." But I have no metrics -- I can't say, "20% of the people use these attributes of the viewer daily, while 80% never touch them" and then make them invisible unless you click on the Bob the Builder button. > Like, i'll be straight up and say that for me, i like a lot about viewer > 2.0! ?But, i so totally *hate* that sidebar bashing into me like someone [removed 2.0 feedback so this thread doesn't get corrupted by it.] I should probably put up some Jiras about how I think it should be done, but there's so many people saying different things, and I'm busy trying to graduate by the end of the month, so LL's gonna have to proceed without my "official" feedback. I'm sure they're heartbroken about it. > windows i can't see through anymore! Nyx Linden said there was an xml file you could edit to fix this. I don't remember getting the details on it, though. Anyone know how to do this? > selection i could make to go back and forth from "RP Mode" or "VW Mode" > with immersion optimised to ?"Professional Mode" or "Utility Mode" where > the VW was more like just another screen or window that had something > interesting going on in it? ?A third mode might even be something sorta > halfway in between & made really simple with lots of help for noobs so the > learning curve wasn't so steep, perilous, or confusing. ?:-P Something like a preferences page where you could turn off certain interface elements, with a few presets as default? > pls, pretty pls don't drag the TPVP argument into it? ?'K? ?i Yes, PLEASE. -Stickman From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Sun Apr 11 14:39:17 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:39:17 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Semi-transparent UI, other modifications to viewer 2 UI (was: Two Worlds) In-Reply-To: References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> Message-ID: <4BC24185.6090309@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/11/2010 11:13 PM, Stickman wrote: > Nyx Linden said there was an xml file you could edit to fix this. I > don't remember getting the details on it, though. Anyone know how to > do this? > Looking at the wiki , it takes some different textures, too, not just an xml modification. But maybe Nyx knows another way? Btw., should anything from https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Tweaks be incorporated into Snowglobe 2? If so, as changes to the default skin or as separate skins? cheers Boroondas -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100411/11998460/attachment.htm From robertltux at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 15:37:12 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 18:37:12 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fwd: Semi-transparent UI, other modifications to viewer 2 UI (was: Two Worlds) In-Reply-To: References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> <4BC24185.6090309@boroon.dasgupta.ch> Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Robert Martin Date: Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 6:36 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Semi-transparent UI, other modifications to viewer 2 UI (was: Two Worlds) To: Boroondas Gupte On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 5:39 PM, Boroondas Gupte wrote: > On 04/11/2010 11:13 PM, Stickman wrote: > > Nyx Linden said there was an xml file you could edit to fix this. I > don't remember getting the details on it, though. Anyone know how to > do this? > > > Looking at the wiki, it takes some different textures, too, not just an xml > modification. But maybe Nyx knows another way? > > Btw., should anything from https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Tweaks > be incorporated into Snowglobe 2? If so, as changes to the default skin or > as separate skins? > My suggestion would be for somebody to figure out what code needs to be redone to reenable skin switching since there are now a few different alt skins running about that use a sledgehammer and c4 method to make the switch. Also a skin SDK would be loverly. -- Robert L Martin -- Robert L Martin From gcanaday at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 16:31:39 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:31:39 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Semi-transparent UI, other modifications to viewer 2 UI In-Reply-To: <4BC24185.6090309@boroon.dasgupta.ch> References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> <4BC24185.6090309@boroon.dasgupta.ch> Message-ID: <4BC25BDB.4000802@gmail.com> The XML file edits are good. I've used them and they work pretty well. But the one with the textures doesn't work so well. Half the UI (window frames, etc) goes completely transparent with the new texture files so is for the most part unusable. --GC On 04/11/2010 05:39 PM, Boroondas Gupte wrote: > On 04/11/2010 11:13 PM, Stickman wrote: >> Nyx Linden said there was an xml file you could edit to fix this. I >> don't remember getting the details on it, though. Anyone know how to >> do this? >> > Looking at the wiki > , > it takes some different textures, too, not just an xml modification. > But maybe Nyx knows another way? > > Btw., should anything from > https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Tweaks be incorporated into > Snowglobe 2? If so, as changes to the default skin or as separate skins? > > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100411/5c59ab59/attachment.htm From snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com Sun Apr 11 18:58:10 2010 From: snowfox102 at dragonkeepcreations.com (Maya Remblai) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 19:58:10 -0600 Subject: [opensource-dev] Two Worlds In-Reply-To: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> Message-ID: <4BC27E32.6020303@dragonkeepcreations.com> aklo at skyhighway.com wrote: > Oh, BTW, if you feel like answering this msg or making a comment or > whatever, pls, pretty pls don't drag the TPVP argument into it? 'K? i > mean, yeah, it's important and all, but this isn't that conversation? > > Normally I'd agree, but actually the two issues *are* related. I wouldn't have said a thing about 2.0 if I were reasonably certain I wouldn't get banned for using a TPV. I haven't used LL viewers in a good year or so, and I don't plan to change that. But the TPVP makes users uneasy about using TPVs. That wouldn't be such a problem if 2.0 didn't cause so much trouble, people would just use that instead. But since we're potentially faced with "update or leave", it *is* a problem. Just my two cents. Maya From robertltux at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 20:43:58 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:43:58 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Mutli-layer images (RFC) Message-ID: With all this talk over changing how clothes work i was thinking Why don't we code for Multi-layer images? Leave the clothing layers as numbered but include support for having multiple layers in a texture. an example of how it could work (and yes it would be very complicated so we may need to target 2.4 or so) allow for a total of 6 layers numbered 0-5 and expose to the inworld editor numbering from 1 (layer 0 would be a special use layer) as an example a shirt layer 5 a slogan or other image layer 4 a somewhat cleaner image layer 3 long sleeves layer 2 short sleeves layer 1 the base shirt layer 0 uploaders copyright data and labels for the upper layers (with age ratings) in the in-world editor allow for folks to turn off any of layers 5 4 or 3 (assumes that the avatar is set for adult access) advatanges 1 this would allow for a huge number of new products 2 the control layer could be used to add in a needed flag for "Full perms does/does not mean export to other grids" 3 this would enable folks a to have a simple way to "watermark" textures questions/problems 1 this would require both changes to the server and the client 2 how many layers should we have?? 3 fall back to "legacy" clients 4 encoding for the control layer (or is this even a sane approach??) -- Robert L Martin From kf6kjg at gmail.com Sun Apr 11 23:00:45 2010 From: kf6kjg at gmail.com (Ricky) Date: Sun, 11 Apr 2010 23:00:45 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Mutli-layer images (RFC) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I'm not sure one way or the other on the idea, but a solution to problem 3 is relatively easy: Just bake the layers together before sending down to the client. That way the rendering system wouldn't have to change and all clients would see it as-is. Only the owner would need know about the layers, and then only when editing. Ricky Cron Stardust On Sun, Apr 11, 2010 at 8:43 PM, Robert Martin wrote: > With all this talk over changing how clothes work i was thinking > Why don't we code for Multi-layer images? Leave the clothing layers as > numbered but include support for having multiple layers in a texture. > > an example of how it could work (and yes it would be very complicated > so we may need to target 2.4 or so) > allow for a total of 6 layers numbered 0-5 and expose to the inworld > editor numbering from 1 (layer 0 would be a special use layer) > as an example a shirt > layer 5 a slogan or other image > layer 4 a somewhat cleaner image > layer 3 long sleeves > layer 2 short sleeves > layer 1 the base shirt > layer 0 uploaders copyright data and labels for the upper layers (with > age ratings) > > in the in-world editor allow for folks to turn off any of layers 5 4 > or 3 (assumes that the avatar is set for adult access) > > advatanges > > 1 this would allow for a huge number of new products > 2 the control layer could be used to add in a needed flag for "Full > perms does/does not mean export to other grids" > 3 this would enable folks a to have a simple way to "watermark" textures > > > questions/problems > > 1 this would require both changes to the server and the client > 2 how many layers should we have?? > 3 fall back to "legacy" clients > 4 encoding for the control layer (or is this even a sane approach??) > > -- > Robert L Martin > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From laurent.bechir at madonie.org Mon Apr 12 03:47:48 2010 From: laurent.bechir at madonie.org (Laurent Bechir) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 12:47:48 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] FMOD 3.75 not available Message-ID: <3DD620E5-996F-4441-8172-7E29D3A7B448@madonie.org> Hello, It seems that fmod 3.75 is not available anymore on fmod.org website. What do you use to build the sources of the viewer ? Thank you From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Mon Apr 12 05:38:01 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 14:38:01 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] FMOD 3.75 not available In-Reply-To: <3DD620E5-996F-4441-8172-7E29D3A7B448@madonie.org> References: <3DD620E5-996F-4441-8172-7E29D3A7B448@madonie.org> Message-ID: <4BC31429.3080004@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/12/2010 12:47 PM, Laurent Bechir wrote: > It seems that fmod 3.75 is not available anymore on fmod.org website. What do you use to build the sources of the viewer ? > The download URL changed. You'll now find the files at http://www.fmod.org/files/fmod3/ See SNOW-600 and SVN changesets 3311 and 3312 . cheers Boroondas PS: Is there some way to bulk-change the FMOD URLs on the wiki? There seem to be surprisingly many articles mentioning FMOD. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/7242bedb/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Mon Apr 12 09:52:27 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 09:52:27 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Two Worlds In-Reply-To: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> References: <6fad7bf1b11451c8503c9e5dc5b5891e.squirrel@cruziomail.cruzio.com> Message-ID: <4BC34FCB.5070506@gmail.com> aklo at skyhighway.com wrote: > For the Big Picture SL presentation i can see something like all the SL > windows, including all the chat, inventory, group, etc - everything (even > HUDs?), being just windows for the OS with the VW its own window that > maybe is maximized and maybe isn't. In maximized mode the VW window could > have the ability to "draw in" or spawn inside without "leaving" the VW any > or all of the windows for chat, inventory, etc in their floaty, sometimes > transparent mode like the Terminator's heads up display that so many like > so well! Y'know, the best of all worlds? > Do you mean something like an interface that allows us to do this: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375 From aklo at skyhighway.com Mon Apr 12 10:40:28 2010 From: aklo at skyhighway.com (aklo at skyhighway.com) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Two Worlds Message-ID: Do you mean something like an interface that allows us to do this: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375 Yes!! That's part of it, anyway. The main point i was trying to make is that i see there as being (at least) two very different types of user communities for SL. One community is like the RP (Role Play) one that wants - needs - as much immersion as possible! i think that all the things that wouldn't be seen if it was real eyes looking at a real world gotta be able to be made as inconspicuous as possible - without losing utility. Floaters and partially transparent windows and all the stuff that goes into the "Terminator style" heads up display are crucial! Another community is like the Professional Services one that only needs SL for a tool to get some task done. "Immersion" is a distraction. i think they just need a virtual conference setting, or school or whatever that can leverage the VW (Virtual World) concept to communicate more effectively. Or maybe just because it's more fun that way! Whatever, having the VW be just another desk top operation is to me more functional than immersing in the VW. The paradigm should even work better for content creators at times, too, since non-SL tools like Blender, Photoshop, etc., can be run on the same screen with SL easier. Right? A third community might be noobs, who could often benefit quite a bit from something that was really close to immersion without losing their familiar desktop feel, and who might be best served with a lot of simplicity and advice until they figure things out. i think the "normal" camera perspective compared to mouseview is one illustration on one level of the principle. Backing further away to the viewer 2.0 way is another step, then something like the system at the URL you gave is another step even further back. Kinda like a VW zoom function that works on "reality level." My thought is that it would be *really great* if at least a couple of the possible VW levels - or SL modes - were as easy to switch between as mouselook and normal camera view. i mean, you could get all sophisticated about it and have this or that feature of the "zoom" be selectable by itself, like something easy to turn screen squishing and partial transparency on and off for the sidebar in viewer 2.0 without a relog. But i think the main thing ought to be just a recognition of the (at least) two different user communities and the need to support both directions without ripping the communities apart, or making one suffer for the other. Thx for the URL ref! aklo at skyhighway.com wrote: > For the Big Picture SL presentation i can see something like all the SL > windows, including all the chat, inventory, group, etc - everything (even > HUDs?), being just windows for the OS with the VW its own window that > maybe is maximized and maybe isn't. In maximized mode the VW window could > have the ability to "draw in" or spawn inside without "leaving" the VW any > or all of the windows for chat, inventory, etc in their floaty, sometimes > transparent mode like the Terminator's heads up display that so many like > so well! Y'know, the best of all worlds? > Do you mean something like an interface that allows us to do this: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-375 From morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com Mon Apr 12 12:41:14 2010 From: morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com (Morgaine) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:41:14 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Accepting the INTENT but not accepting the TPV Message-ID: A few people have made the rather extraordinary suggestion that the TPV is "OK" because the intent is good, no matter how dreadful its wording. They ignore the fact that what matters in court is the actual wording. It is the *words* that a user must agree to, not the intent. Faced with the silliness of "intent" as a mitigating factor, perhaps what is needed is an equally silly response: - Let's write a new document that expresses the *intent* of LL's TPV, but written cleanly and without any overreaching clauses. Let's call that new document the *TPV Intended Policy Document*, or *IPD* for short. - Modify the GPL viewer (which you have a license to do without further restrictions, a freedom that was granted to you by LL) in such a way that, on detecting the incoming Linden TPV Policy document, it presents you with the *IPD* instead. Click on the Agree button if you agree with the *intent of the TPV*, and TAKE A SCREEN SHOT OF IT, just in case. - Go back to doing something useful with your time. I hope we don't need to descend to this level of comedy. The TPV should state what is intended, not something totally different. I recommend that we use tomorrow's meeting with Joe to affirm this. Morgaine. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/d079925d/attachment.htm From martin at traumwind.de Mon Apr 12 13:15:08 2010 From: martin at traumwind.de (Martin Spernau) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 22:15:08 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Accepting the INTENT but not accepting the TPV In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: As much as I dislike(d) the ongoing discussion about the TPVP, I DO love this suggestion Laughter (and sillyness) is alwa the best answer to any problem - thanks for suggesting this Am 12.04.2010 um 21:41 schrieb Morgaine: > A few people have made the rather extraordinary suggestion that the > TPV is "OK" because the intent is good, no matter how dreadful its > wording. They ignore the fact that what matters in court is the > actual wording. It is the words that a user must agree to, not the > intent. > > Faced with the silliness of "intent" as a mitigating factor, perhaps > what is needed is an equally silly response: > > Let's write a new document that expresses the intent of LL's TPV, > but written cleanly and without any overreaching clauses. Let's > call that new document the TPV Intended Policy Document, or IPD for > short. > Modify the GPL viewer (which you have a license to do without > further restrictions, a freedom that was granted to you by LL) in > such a way that, on detecting the incoming Linden TPV Policy > document, it presents you with the IPD instead. Click on the Agree > button if you agree with the intent of the TPV, and TAKE A SCREEN > SHOT OF IT, just in case. > Go back to doing something useful with your time. > > I hope we don't need to descend to this level of comedy. The TPV > should state what is intended, not something totally different. > > I recommend that we use tomorrow's meeting with Joe to affirm this. > > > Morgaine. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/2a58234c/attachment.htm From dale at daleglass.net Mon Apr 12 13:33:28 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:33:28 +0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already Message-ID: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> Today I heard that there's already a proxy available that makes a viewer appear to be one of those in the directory of officially approved third party viewers. It also randomizes the MAC. I'd rather not link to it, but it's not hard to find. So, I wonder, what now? Does LL have some way of telling for sure when a viewer is presenting itself as another? Or will Legolas, Kurz and KirstenLee end up having annoying discussions with somebody from LL on this subject, or maybe even getting banned? Of course maybe this will be ignored entirely, users who abuse things like these will be banned and the developers will continue as before, but then what was the point? From tom at streamsense.net Mon Apr 12 13:42:36 2010 From: tom at streamsense.net (Thomas Grimshaw) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:42:36 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: <4BC385BC.4010301@streamsense.net> This was always going to happen, and it will continue to happen. Of course in this case, the "proxy" counts as the third party viewer really, and is in violation of the TPV. Not that violating the TPV really matters. Tom. Dale Glass wrote: > Today I heard that there's already a proxy available that makes a viewer > appear to be one of those in the directory of officially approved third party > viewers. It also randomizes the MAC. I'd rather not link to it, but it's not > hard to find. > > So, I wonder, what now? Does LL have some way of telling for sure when a > viewer is presenting itself as another? Or will Legolas, Kurz and KirstenLee > end up having annoying discussions with somebody from LL on this subject, or > maybe even getting banned? > > Of course maybe this will be ignored entirely, users who abuse things like > these will be banned and the developers will continue as before, but then what > was the point? > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From Celierra at gmail.com Mon Apr 12 13:52:48 2010 From: Celierra at gmail.com (Celierra Darling) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:52:48 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: There's still other facets. For example, the approved viewers get some publicity and reputation by being on the approved viewers page, and it makes people think that much harder about using sketchy viewers to do sketchy things. (And yeah, they have to do one extra sketchy thing, as Thomas mentions.) (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same IP with random MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. There's a few more hoops left to jump through there.) Celi On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Dale Glass wrote: > > Of course maybe this will be ignored entirely, users who abuse things like > these will be banned and the developers will continue as before, but then > what > was the point? > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/e13ea7c0/attachment.htm From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Mon Apr 12 14:07:04 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 23:07:04 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: <4BC38B78.7010907@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/12/2010 10:52 PM, Celierra Darling wrote: > (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same IP with > random MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. Does it? I'd assume someone testing network cards of different manufacturers for SL compatibility would cause a very similar pattern (same account and IP, but different MACs). Boroondas From dale at daleglass.net Mon Apr 12 14:07:16 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 01:07:16 +0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> ? ????????? ?? ??????? 13 ?????? 2010 00:52:48 ?? ????????: > There's still other facets. For example, the approved viewers get some > publicity and reputation by being on the approved viewers page, and it > makes people think that much harder about using sketchy viewers to do > sketchy things. (And yeah, they have to do one extra sketchy thing, as > Thomas mentions.) I don't think it makes a big difference. I'm talking about a group with a "FOR THE LULZ!" motto. I don't think they care much about keeping any account of theirs for very long. > > (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same IP with random > MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. There's a few more > hoops left to jump through there.) That will take some work though. At my house there are 5 computers that could run a SL client, that's 5 MACs, all behind the same NATed IP address. Schools, workplaces, cafes, etc could have hundreds of legitimate ones. From tillie at xp2.de Mon Apr 12 15:55:09 2010 From: tillie at xp2.de (Tillie Ariantho) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 00:55:09 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] VC 2010 Express? Message-ID: <4BC3A4CD.2050305@xp2.de> Hello, anyone downloaded VC 2010 Express yet and tried to compile SL with it? http://www.microsoft.com/express/Downloads/#2010-Visual-CPP Tillie From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Mon Apr 12 16:03:22 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:03:22 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: Yah, but it might start looking a bit suspicious if it looks like you're using computers as one-time pads, always using a different system for each connection for a certain account? Might not be as easily detectable for the short-term accounts that get banned within minutes, but anything with history would stick out fairly obviously. On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Dale Glass wrote: > ? ????????? ?? ??????? 13 ?????? 2010 00:52:48 ?? ????????: > > There's still other facets. For example, the approved viewers get some > > publicity and reputation by being on the approved viewers page, and it > > makes people think that much harder about using sketchy viewers to do > > sketchy things. (And yeah, they have to do one extra sketchy thing, as > > Thomas mentions.) > I don't think it makes a big difference. > > I'm talking about a group with a "FOR THE LULZ!" motto. I don't think they > care much about keeping any account of theirs for very long. > > > > > (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same IP with random > > MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. There's a few more > > hoops left to jump through there.) > That will take some work though. At my house there are 5 computers that > could > run a SL client, that's 5 MACs, all behind the same NATed IP address. > Schools, > workplaces, cafes, etc could have hundreds of legitimate ones. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/17b3002b/attachment.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Mon Apr 12 16:19:06 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 16:19:06 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] VC 2010 Express? In-Reply-To: <4BC3A4CD.2050305@xp2.de> References: <4BC3A4CD.2050305@xp2.de> Message-ID: <895466.61944.qm@web43504.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Working on VC 2008 Express at present. Can compile and run but have been unable complete the build into a redistributable package. Plan to leverage the leaning into VC 2010 Express. NickyP ________________________________ From: Tillie Ariantho To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Mon, April 12, 2010 5:55:09 PM Subject: [opensource-dev] VC 2010 Express? Hello, anyone downloaded VC 2010 Express yet and tried to compile SL with it? http://www.microsoft.com/express/Downloads/#2010-Visual-CPP 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/442b2665/attachment.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Mon Apr 12 16:45:17 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:45:17 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] [server-beta] Havok 7 Testing Info In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC3B08D.8080207@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 (crossposting this since i got a message telling me i'm not expected to post on the server beta list without moderation and i feel this message should reach the Ls) I believe it would be a good idea to keep H7 in testing stage until a bit of time after the TPVP thing has been cleared up with most TPV developers and users, otherwise there is a big risk that a reduced number of people will test H7 and content breaking stuff will slip by. On 12/4/2010 17:45, Oskar Linden wrote: > There is now a wiki page with Havok 7 testing guidelines. Please read > through and then hop on and check it out. > > - http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Havok_7_Beta_Home > > We will be offering more targeted testing guidelines in the near > future but at this time are really hoping that people just test out > whatever they can. Crashes are good, but please repro crashes found on > the debug server builds. Crashes without filing a JIRA don't help us > so please do that. Also repeatedly crashing regions doesn't help us. > > If you know anyone who would be interested in helping to test havok > have them sign up for this email list here: > - https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/server-beta > > Then they should join the group Second Life BETA on AGNI and IM me on > AGNI about getting their account transferred over to ADITI. > > Since there are a lot of people testing on the oatmeal regions at the > same please be considerate of work they might be doing. Other than > that, have fun! :-) > > __Oskar > _______________________________________________ > Click here to unsubscribe or manage your list subscription: > https://lists.secondlife.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/server-beta > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvDsIcACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUDiwCdGBFK9Gxd2AuSsTm5IPhWqwZt dJoAnj5IVD97o3IyeZOCvG41TW6o5yFY =ku42 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 12 18:48:11 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:48:11 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Extra Hippo meeting Message-ID: Hi, We had this discussion going for a while o this list (how to communicate better) and one thing that emerged was to help another meeting IW during the week so that people who can't attend the first one can attend the other. At the last Hippo meeting, we decided that this new meeting will be on: - Tuesday, 2pm SLT - Same place : Hippotropolis Theater ( http://slurl.com/secondlife/Hippotropolis/248/15/25/ ) See you there! Cheers - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/d71f4977/attachment.htm From latha at solarmirror.com Mon Apr 12 19:28:01 2010 From: latha at solarmirror.com (Latha Serevi) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:28:01 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC bridge for brown-bag, Tuesday 4/13 noon PDT References: 4BC0B497.8070004@Gmail.com Message-ID: <4BC3D6B1.5070007@solarmirror.com> Although Joe's brown-bag Tuesday noon PDT is taking place via SL voice, some of us SL interop folks will try to provide as decent an IRC bridge of the text chat portion as we can manage, to the channel irc://irc.quickfox.net/groupies The bridge will be bidirectional and we'll do what we can to transcribe the voice comments into text. No guarantees on how satisfying the result will be. Cheers Latha Serevi (SL) From joe at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 12 19:34:55 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 19:34:55 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC bridge for brown-bag, Tuesday 4/13 noon PDT In-Reply-To: <4BC3D6B1.5070007@solarmirror.com> References: <4BC3D6B1.5070007@solarmirror.com> Message-ID: I will also try to provide a dial-in bridge (using the AvaLine access numbers) for access to the voice channel for people who can't (or won't) make it in-world. I'll post the dialing information for that as soon as I've fully tested it in the proximal channel we're using tomorrow. -- joe On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 7:28 PM, Latha Serevi wrote: > Although Joe's brown-bag Tuesday noon PDT is taking place via SL voice, > some of us SL interop folks will try to provide as decent an IRC bridge > of the text chat portion as we can manage, to the channel > > irc://irc.quickfox.net/groupies > > The bridge will be bidirectional and we'll do what we can to transcribe > the voice comments into text. No guarantees on how satisfying the > result will be. > > Cheers > Latha Serevi (SL) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100412/76ab0653/attachment.htm From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Mon Apr 12 20:00:30 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:00:30 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> Message-ID: <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Certain griefer viewers already bypass this form of profiling. I won't detail how. Fred Rookstown On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:03 -0700, Erik Anderson wrote: > Yah, but it might start looking a bit suspicious if it looks like > you're using computers as one-time pads, always using a different > system for each connection for a certain account? Might not be as > easily detectable for the short-term accounts that get banned within > minutes, but anything with history would stick out fairly obviously. > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Dale Glass > wrote: > ? ????????? ?? ??????? 13 ?????? 2010 00:52:48 ?? ????????: > > There's still other facets. For example, the approved > viewers get some > > publicity and reputation by being on the approved viewers > page, and it > > makes people think that much harder about using sketchy > viewers to do > > sketchy things. (And yeah, they have to do one extra > sketchy thing, as > > Thomas mentions.) > > I don't think it makes a big difference. > > I'm talking about a group with a "FOR THE LULZ!" motto. I > don't think they > care much about keeping any account of theirs for very long. > > > > > (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same > IP with random > > MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. There's > a few more > > hoops left to jump through there.) > > That will take some work though. At my house there are 5 > computers that could > run a SL client, that's 5 MACs, all behind the same NATed IP > address. Schools, > workplaces, cafes, etc could have hundreds of legitimate ones. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From robin.cornelius at gmail.com Tue Apr 13 04:22:43 2010 From: robin.cornelius at gmail.com (Robin Cornelius) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 12:22:43 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC bridge for brown-bag, Tuesday 4/13 noon PDT In-Reply-To: References: <4BC3D6B1.5070007@solarmirror.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Joe Linden wrote: > I will also try to provide a dial-in bridge (using the AvaLine access > numbers) for access to the voice channel for people who can't (or won't) > make it in-world.? I'll post the dialing information for that as soon as > I've fully tested it in the proximal channel we're using tomorrow. > I've also got an IRC bridge ready to roll, and a shoutcast server set up to stream in world voice chat, hopefully it will be working correctly later and this combined with the other options gives a lot of possible ways to participate in the events and hear what is going on. My bridge is currently on EFNet channel #brownbag Robin From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Tue Apr 13 08:04:20 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:04:20 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: Whether or not these tools are long term effective is irrelevant. The fact these tools exist is simply the point Dale was trying to make. The whole TPVP is a "Feel Good" Policy to delude residents into believing Linden Lab can prevent the criminal element from having the tools to grief or violate IP/CopyRight and keep them out. Despite the fact copybot and proxy hacks like God Mode have been around longer then the OS viewer, many residents blame the OS viewer for making such acts possible which all of us old timers who paid attention and all of us OS developers/contributors know isn't the case. As Real Life has proven over and over again, no Law or Policy will prevent criminals from obtaining the tools they need to commit crime and only hurt legitimate residents in the end. Ron Festa Virtual Worlds Admin Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY Phone: 732-474-8583 On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Rob Nelson wrote: > Certain griefer viewers already bypass this form of profiling. I won't > detail how. > > Fred Rookstown > > On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:03 -0700, Erik Anderson wrote: > > Yah, but it might start looking a bit suspicious if it looks like > > you're using computers as one-time pads, always using a different > > system for each connection for a certain account? Might not be as > > easily detectable for the short-term accounts that get banned within > > minutes, but anything with history would stick out fairly obviously. > > > > On Mon, Apr 12, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Dale Glass > > wrote: > > ? ????????? ?? ??????? 13 ?????? 2010 00:52:48 ?? ????????: > > > There's still other facets. For example, the approved > > viewers get some > > > publicity and reputation by being on the approved viewers > > page, and it > > > makes people think that much harder about using sketchy > > viewers to do > > > sketchy things. (And yeah, they have to do one extra > > sketchy thing, as > > > Thomas mentions.) > > > > I don't think it makes a big difference. > > > > I'm talking about a group with a "FOR THE LULZ!" motto. I > > don't think they > > care much about keeping any account of theirs for very long. > > > > > > > > (As an aside, connecting from the same account and/or same > > IP with random > > > MACs seems pretty obviously strange and detectable. There's > > a few more > > > hoops left to jump through there.) > > > > That will take some work though. At my house there are 5 > > computers that could > > run a SL client, that's 5 MACs, all behind the same NATed IP > > address. Schools, > > workplaces, cafes, etc could have hundreds of legitimate ones. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100413/b922b685/attachment.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Tue Apr 13 10:27:36 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:27:36 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC bridge for brown-bag, Tuesday 4/13 noon PDT In-Reply-To: References: <4BC3D6B1.5070007@solarmirror.com> Message-ID: <4BC4A988.7090508@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 perhaps it would be better if you named the channel somthing more specific, even if that makes the name bigger On 13/4/2010 08:22, Robin Cornelius wrote: > On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 3:34 AM, Joe Linden wrote: >> I will also try to provide a dial-in bridge (using the AvaLine access >> numbers) for access to the voice channel for people who can't (or won't) >> make it in-world. I'll post the dialing information for that as soon as >> I've fully tested it in the proximal channel we're using tomorrow. >> > > I've also got an IRC bridge ready to roll, and a shoutcast server set > up to stream in world voice chat, hopefully it will be working > correctly later and this combined with the other options gives a lot > of possible ways to participate in the events and hear what is going > on. > > My bridge is currently on EFNet channel #brownbag > > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvEqUsACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUiTQCfTqEO1kUF8dhOGkdQfebSrozs 5e8An3uMvYN9FFGvuebZzPWi2dt6f5DM =vF/j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Tue Apr 13 11:06:42 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:06:42 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: I've heard Linden Labs make this exact same argument multiple times in the past in response to resident reaction over this, so I'm fairly sure that they are very fully aware of this fact. 2010/4/13 Ron Festa > Whether or not these tools are long term effective is irrelevant. The fact > these tools exist is simply the point Dale was trying to make. The whole > TPVP is a "Feel Good" Policy to delude residents into believing Linden Lab > can prevent the criminal element from having the tools to grief or violate > IP/CopyRight and keep them out. Despite the fact copybot and proxy hacks > like God Mode have been around longer then the OS viewer, many residents > blame the OS viewer for making such acts possible which all of us old timers > who paid attention and all of us OS developers/contributors know isn't the > case. As Real Life has proven over and over again, no Law or Policy will > prevent criminals from obtaining the tools they need to commit crime and > only hurt legitimate residents in the end. > > Ron Festa > Virtual Worlds Admin > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100413/183647dc/attachment.htm From aklo at skyhighway.com Tue Apr 13 11:27:21 2010 From: aklo at skyhighway.com (aklo at skyhighway.com) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 11:27:21 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC bridge for brown-bag, Tuesday 4/13 noon PDT Message-ID: i must have lost the SLURL for the brownbag that starts at noon. i may be able to attend the meeting, if only to listen. Could someone pls let me know what the SLURL is? THX!! -AK From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Tue Apr 13 11:29:33 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:29:33 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: That is correct. Phillip Linden made the same arguments when he was still CEO/President of the Lab when people like Prokofy cried and demanded LL take action to proactively prevent criminal activity on the grid especially when it involves IP rights. Its a truth that Phillip recognized that authority figures like Linden Lab can only *react to criminal activity as it happens and its impossible to truly prevent it.* The TPVP is more or less an example of a clear cut distinction between M's and Phillip's management styles. Ron Festa Virtual Worlds Admin Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY Phone: 732-474-8583 On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 2:06 PM, Erik Anderson < erikba at odysseus.anderson.name> wrote: > I've heard Linden Labs make this exact same argument multiple times in the > past in response to resident reaction over this, so I'm fairly sure that > they are very fully aware of this fact. > > 2010/4/13 Ron Festa > > Whether or not these tools are long term effective is irrelevant. The fact >> these tools exist is simply the point Dale was trying to make. The whole >> TPVP is a "Feel Good" Policy to delude residents into believing Linden Lab >> can prevent the criminal element from having the tools to grief or violate >> IP/CopyRight and keep them out. Despite the fact copybot and proxy hacks >> like God Mode have been around longer then the OS viewer, many residents >> blame the OS viewer for making such acts possible which all of us old timers >> who paid attention and all of us OS developers/contributors know isn't the >> case. As Real Life has proven over and over again, no Law or Policy will >> prevent criminals from obtaining the tools they need to commit crime and >> only hurt legitimate residents in the end. >> >> Ron Festa >> Virtual Worlds Admin >> Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University >> PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY >> Phone: 732-474-8583 >> >> > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100413/b688e86c/attachment-0001.htm From robertltux at gmail.com Tue Apr 13 11:30:24 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:30:24 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: Dusting off an old statement The 3PVp will be a semi joke until LL decides to put up a compile farm and begin creating "signed builds". Even not using proxies and other cloaking all somebody has to do is get the source for a listed viewer and then hack and recompile. Oh and They can't wait until you can create plugins for the base viewer. -- Robert L Martin From secret.argent at gmail.com Tue Apr 13 12:26:13 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 14:26:13 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <1575D28F-2C61-4568-A783-D93F95FA53E6@gmail.com> On 2010-04-13, at 13:30, Robert Martin wrote: > The 3PVp will be a semi joke until LL decides to put up a compile farm > and begin creating "signed builds". Oh no! That will mean the ripoff artists will have to port over the tools they already use to inject code into Warcraft and Everquest! From blakar at gmail.com Tue Apr 13 12:47:55 2010 From: blakar at gmail.com (Dirk Moerenhout) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:47:55 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: <1575D28F-2C61-4568-A783-D93F95FA53E6@gmail.com> References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> <1575D28F-2C61-4568-A783-D93F95FA53E6@gmail.com> Message-ID: It'll be possible to copy content as long as there are viewers. If you can see it on your screen there is always a way to make a copy that is reusable. Now obviously, all client issues aside, it's perfectly possible to identify copies if they are loaded back into SL. As long as they're not significantly different it's possible to identify copied textures, objects ... automatically. It'll eat resources but that's the way we'll be heading anyway when it comes to content. Similar things are being done to identify copyrighted video material and audio. On 13 April 2010 21:26, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > On 2010-04-13, at 13:30, Robert Martin wrote: >> The 3PVp will be a semi joke until LL decides to put up a compile farm >> and begin creating "signed builds". > > Oh no! That will mean the ripoff artists will have to port over the > tools they already use to inject code into Warcraft and Everquest! > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From jamey at beau.org Tue Apr 13 16:30:36 2010 From: jamey at beau.org (Jamey Fletcher) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 18:30:36 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <4BC4FE9C.30200@beau.org> Robert Martin wrote: > Dusting off an old statement > The 3PVp will be a semi joke until LL decides to put up a compile farm > and begin creating "signed builds". Even not using proxies and other > cloaking all somebody has to do is get the source for a listed viewer > and then hack and recompile. > Oh and They can't wait until you can create plugins for the base viewer. Signed builds won't do any good unless you sign your entire computer over to the Trusted Computing Platform, at which point, be prepared for files to disappear whenever one of your software suppliers decides you shouldn't have that particular file. Say, for example, that competitor's software, that MP3 file you paid for 3 years ago, but a new company bought the rights to it, and decided your previously perpetual license is no longer valid, or that article you're typing up in their cloud/browser based word processing program that explains how they deleted files you had a perfect right to own. Meanwhile, those few allowed to create and distribute content will be bemoaning the pirates who have hacked around the TPM module in their computers, wanting a tax on everyone to cover monies lost to these alleged pirates. Anyone creating *FREE* content, and trying to distribute it to who-ever wants it, will find that they're charged by the byte they type, and someone else will be charging by the byte for their readers to read it. It's kind of amazing how people keep making the same suggestions for how to prevent piracy of some kind, despite said methods being previously discussed and found wanting in similar contexts for 20 or 30 years now. Anyone remember dark burgundy sheets of paper with odd codes on it to prevent copying of games? Just how well did *THOSE* work? From merov at lindenlab.com Tue Apr 13 16:49:03 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:49:03 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 trunk binaries available Message-ID: Hi, Whohoo! Yes! We now have the parabuild automated build system running correctly on the 3 platforms and posting results to S3 successfully! The only thing that's missing to make ua perfectly happy is having the notification email working too... One last little snag to fix... The links to the binaries are here under though. I've been told that we have crashers on the Linux version. Keep in mind that those are *trunk* builds, not final polished ones. Expect more of those and more sync to viewer-2-0 as soon as we fix the notification email issue. Big thanks to Techwolf and Thickbrick for hepling fix the Linux build issue yesterday: you're my heroes guys! :) Downloads: Windows: http://secondlife.com/developers/opensource/downloads/2010/trunk/3318/Snowglobe_2-0-0-3318_Setup.exe Darwin: http://secondlife.com/developers/opensource/downloads/2010/trunk/3318/Snowglobe_2_0_0_3318_SNOWGLOBETESTBUILD.dmg Linux: http://secondlife.com/developers/opensource/downloads/2010/trunk/3318/Snowglobe-i686-2.0.0.3318.tar.bz2 Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100413/9a8fff9a/attachment.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Tue Apr 13 17:11:29 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 17:11:29 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. SNOW-604 In-Reply-To: <297527.48692.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <61410.18840.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <201004092353.54482.thickbrick.sleaford@gmail.com> <297527.48692.qm@web43506.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi, Yes, I'm aware of this and have been working with folks internally to create a new set of bundles for 1.x. Having some problems wrangling the parabuild monster but getting there, hopefully before the week ends. Cheers, - Merov On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:23 PM, Nicky Perian wrote: > Thickbrick, > Thanks > Nicky > Couldn't make the meeting yesterday. > > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Thickbrick Sleaford > *To:* opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com > *Cc:* Nicky Perian > *Sent:* Fri, April 9, 2010 3:53:54 PM > *Subject:* Re: [opensource-dev] SG 1-4 artwork zip file corrupted. > SNOW-604 > > On Friday 09 April 2010 20:45:41 Nicky Perian wrote: > > > http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-604?ticket=ST-1291-Du2hp64P1FjUKtaRa > > 4G1hKGawJEXOEadOKW-20 > > > > Could a Linden please take a look? > > > > Thanks > > Nicky > > The S3 urls in doc/asset_urls.txt give a 403 error ("Access Denied"): > > http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/browser/projects/2009/snowglobe/trunk/doc/asset_urls.txt > > This looks like it's the same problem as with build log urls from > sldev-commit > messages, which we discussed yesterday at the open source meeting. Merov > said > he will be looking into it, IIRC. > > -- > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100413/92d9fc2e/attachment.htm From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Wed Apr 14 01:28:55 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:28:55 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? Message-ID: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Hey all, just got this notecard inworld: "Hello. You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane and Scarlett Vielle. Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". If you would like to join the defendants against this paperwork-greifer in a counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL name and anything else at primeinx at gmail.com Do not be scared 1) Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected copyright from the moment they made anything. (The US copyright office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue free copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) 2) There is no copyright registered in the united states: http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First 3) Linden Labs cannot be sued. Yet he filed against them. 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. 5) He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he cannot copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. Lets create a group and fight him off shall we? zFire" ... is that guy out of his mind? From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 03:08:20 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 05:08:20 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: Lance, hey just FYI man...This is something you want to contact Linden Labs directly about, not post it to this mailing list. That being said, let me share with you a piece of wisdom from being in SL for 5 years. When you've seen it once, you've seen it a million times. People just like to target LL for random reasons, mostly because they got their feelings hurt and want to "take their toys and stomp home to mommy and daddy". Don't worry about that notecard. It's probably just random spam trying to raise awareness for another pointless cause in Second Life and also to cloud your group allocation. If they really wanted to, they'd just add you to a Hippo Group. :) People love making "I'm pissed at Linden Labs so I'm going to make a group in Second Life and use Second Life to flame about it" groups. Also, rest assured, this won't leave Second Life. It's not like your virtual presence can be given a subpoena . Jonathan Irvin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/39d834e1/attachment.htm From tateru.nino at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 04:33:16 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:33:16 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <4BC5A7FC.7010504@gmail.com> I'm aware of the speed-rez stuff, because it's been discussed numerous times over the last five years. The earliest mention I can recall off the top of my head is a suggestion from Phoenix back in early 06. I've already read the complaint and docs and I'm working on an article on it. On 14/04/2010 6:28 PM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Hey all, > > just got this notecard inworld: > > "Hello. > > You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane > and Scarlett Vielle. > Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to > manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". > > If you would like to join the defendants against this paperwork-greifer in a > counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL name and anything else at > primeinx at gmail.com > > Do not be scared > 1) Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected copyright > from the moment they made anything. > (The US copyright office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue > free copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) > > 2) There is no copyright registered in the united states: > http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First > > 3) Linden Labs cannot be sued. Yet he filed against them. > > 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. > > 5) He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he cannot > copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". > > He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. > > If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. > Lets create a group and fight him off shall we? > > zFire" > > > ... is that guy out of his mind? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From Anders at Arnholm.se Wed Apr 14 04:55:20 2010 From: Anders at Arnholm.se (Anders Arnholm) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:55:20 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Viewers in the directory are being impersonated already In-Reply-To: References: <201004130033.28581.dale@daleglass.net> <201004130107.16204.dale@daleglass.net> <1271127630.4821.0.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <20100414115520.GA19841@arnholm.se> On Tue, Apr 13, 2010 at 02:30:24PM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: > Dusting off an old statement > > The 3PVp will be a semi joke until LL decides to put up a compile farm > and begin creating "signed builds". Even not using proxies and other > cloaking all somebody has to do is get the source for a listed viewer > and then hack and recompile. There is still no way a server on the internet can know what is running on the other end. The only into a build farm can add is the same as someone sign the build to tell the user it's matching a source code version. It's can however never protect the servers from any kind ofg hacked viewers with extra functions as save all to disk, overlaod others viewers. etc. -- o_ Anders Arnholm, o/ /\ anders at arnholm.se /|_, \\ http://anders.arnholm.se/ / ` -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From carlo at alinoe.com Wed Apr 14 05:00:58 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:00:58 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> This guy really filed a lawsuit. Such people exist, ... one of the reasons I REALLY don't want to work on a SL viewer when there is a TOS that says I'm responsible and liable for any damages done as a result of using that viewer. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 10:28:55AM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Hey all, > > just got this notecard inworld: > > "Hello. > > You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane > and Scarlett Vielle. > Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to > manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". > > If you would like to join the defendants against this paperwork-greifer in a > counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL name and anything else at > primeinx at gmail.com > > Do not be scared > 1) Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected copyright > from the moment they made anything. > (The US copyright office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue > free copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) > > 2) There is no copyright registered in the united states: > http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First > > 3) Linden Labs cannot be sued. Yet he filed against them. > > 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. > > 5) He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he cannot > copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". > > He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. > > If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. > Lets create a group and fight him off shall we? > > zFire" > > > ... is that guy out of his mind? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Carlo Wood From chaosstar at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 05:39:26 2010 From: chaosstar at gmail.com (Ambrosia) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:39:26 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 14:00, Carlo Wood wrote: > This guy really filed a lawsuit. > > Such people exist, ... one of the reasons I REALLY don't want to work > on a SL viewer when there is a TOS that says I'm responsible and > liable for any damages done as a result of using that viewer. > The lawsuit in question isn't about him going against Emerald. The Emerald Speed Rezzer is a set of gestures that change the draw distance in Emerald in steps for more ordered rezzing, hence the 'Emerald' part in the name. He's supposedly going after rival products. --Chalice Yao From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Wed Apr 14 05:47:42 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:47:42 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <201004141447.42802.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 14:39:26 schrieb Ambrosia: > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 14:00, Carlo Wood wrote: > > This guy really filed a lawsuit. > > > > Such people exist, ... one of the reasons I REALLY don't want to work > > on a SL viewer when there is a TOS that says I'm responsible and > > liable for any damages done as a result of using that viewer. > > The lawsuit in question isn't about him going against Emerald. The > Emerald Speed Rezzer is a set of gestures that change the draw > distance in Emerald in steps for more ordered rezzing, hence the > 'Emerald' part in the name. > > He's supposedly going after rival products. I don't really see the "rival product" in my case. I don't even HAVE any product that would rival his "speed rezzer gesture" at all. and what henri has is the same feature in a different implementation (100% viewer internally), so it's not as if you could use emerald and something sold or given away for free by henri INSTEAD of this guys script. > > --Chalice Yao From robertltux at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 05:49:33 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:49:33 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Ambrosia wrote: > He's supposedly going after rival products. > and the big problem is how he is defining "rival products" hes claiming copyright on any gesture In the form of dd 0 wait 1 dd 4 wait 1 dd 8 wait 1 .. dd 64 (or whatever the set normal draw distance is) while i give him credit for figuring out some sort of optimal set of steps and pauses THIS IS NOT WORTH ANY KIND OF MONEY (since its sort of the whole point of the command in question) -- Robert L Martin From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 05:52:02 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:52:02 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list Message-ID: To Whom It May Concern: I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related development at all. To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic? I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like. Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share our misery post". Respectfully & Best Regards, Jonathan Irvin SL Resident of 5 Years. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/3076d514/attachment.htm From chaosstar at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 05:53:09 2010 From: chaosstar at gmail.com (Ambrosia) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:53:09 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> Message-ID: > and what henri has is the same feature in a different implementation (100% > viewer internally), so it's not as if you could use emerald and something sold > or given away for free by henri INSTEAD of this guys script. > THIS IS NOT WORTH ANY KIND OF MONEY (since its sort of the whole point > of the command in question) I was just clarifying that he's not going after Emerald, in regards to the comment about the viewer TPV/TOS. :3 That is all. Aside of that, I won't make a comment about the product or steps being taken. --Chalice Yao From dzonatas at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 06:35:01 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 06:35:01 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC5C485.2040404@gmail.com> +1 I already trashed a few attempts to write an e-mail to try to say what you have. Jonathan Irvin wrote: > To Whom It May Concern: > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this > specific topic? > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like. > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet > those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets > get together and share our misery post". > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > Jonathan Irvin > SL Resident of 5 Years. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Wed Apr 14 06:27:05 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:27:05 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I feel your frustration, however, this is the *opensource-dev* mailing list *not* the *snowglobe-dev* mailing list. Both SnowGlobe and TPV's are open source viewers based on Linden Lab's mainline viewer the only difference is Snowglobe is distributed by LL. Discussion on policies that effect open source development should be encouraged. If you only want to see stuff relating to SnowGlobe then either encourage LL create a snowglobe-dev list or configure your mail filters to only allow email related to snowglobe to enter your inbox from this list. Ron Festa Virtual Worlds Admin Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY Phone: 732-474-8583 On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > To Whom It May Concern: > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development > of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different > topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer > policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related > development at all. > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different > forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the > flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic? > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party > Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the > third party viewer policy they do not like. > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those > who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life > viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read > yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share > our misery post". > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > Jonathan Irvin > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/e039ac1b/attachment-0001.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Wed Apr 14 06:31:11 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:31:11 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100414120058.GA21123@alinoe.com> Message-ID: I think the point was that SL has a lot of users with trigger-happy lawyers On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ambrosia wrote: >> and what henri has is the same feature in a different implementation (100% >> viewer internally), so it's not as if you could use emerald and something sold >> or given away for free by henri INSTEAD of this guys script. > >> THIS IS NOT WORTH ANY KIND OF MONEY (since its sort of the whole point >> of the command in question) > > I was just clarifying that he's not going after Emerald, in regards to > the comment about the viewer TPV/TOS. :3 That is all. Aside of that, I > won't make a comment about the product or steps being taken. > > --Chalice Yao > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Wed Apr 14 06:38:26 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:38:26 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <201004141538.27580.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> the guy can kiss his "product" good bye anyways: http://is.gd/bsmy5 next emerald release diasables that "speedrezzing hack", so all he gets from his dmca spoof is loads of abuse reports for selling defective products. Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 15:31:11 schrieb Gareth Nelson: > I think the point was that SL has a lot of users with trigger-happy lawyers > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Ambrosia wrote: > >> and what henri has is the same feature in a different implementation > >> (100% viewer internally), so it's not as if you could use emerald and > >> something sold or given away for free by henri INSTEAD of this guys > >> script. > >> > >> THIS IS NOT WORTH ANY KIND OF MONEY (since its sort of the whole point > >> of the command in question) > > > > I was just clarifying that he's not going after Emerald, in regards to > > the comment about the viewer TPV/TOS. :3 That is all. Aside of that, I > > won't make a comment about the product or steps being taken. > > > > --Chalice Yao > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 From dale at daleglass.net Wed Apr 14 06:40:45 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:40:45 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100414134042.GA23452@mx1.daleglass.net> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 07:52:02AM -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > To Whom It May Concern: > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development > of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different > topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer > policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related > development at all. Believe me, I'd much prefer to talk about something else. But this issue makes it difficult for me to continue development. I believe it is appropiate to discuss things that impede development on the development mailing list. > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different > forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the > flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic? That is fine with me, so long LL's presence on that list is assured. > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party > Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the > third party viewer policy they do not like. I disagree. I believe development issues belong in the development list, and since this issue threatens my development efforts I bring it to the best place I know for it. (note: I may not have been posting lately, but I do have work in progress) > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those > who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life > viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read > yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share > our misery post". I disagree yet again. I feel it actually *has* been productive, if only because Joe decided the unresolved issues warranted a conference yesterday and another next tuesday. For me it's not about "sharing misery", it's about getting a reaction and answers from LL. And for that purpose I bring up things that I consider relevant. I thought the impersonation post was relevant because LL's response to such things is important, and one of the things that will determine whether SL development remains safe enough for me to get involved with, or not. > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > Jonathan Irvin > SL Resident of 5 Years. Regards, Dale Glass SL Resident of 4 Years Viewer and bot developer From robin.cornelius at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 06:55:41 2010 From: robin.cornelius at gmail.com (Robin Cornelius) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:55:41 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Ron Festa wrote: > I feel your frustration, however, this is the opensource-dev mailing list > not the snowglobe-dev mailing list. Both SnowGlobe and TPV's are open source > viewers based on Linden Lab's mainline viewer the only difference is > Snowglobe is distributed by LL. Discussion on policies that effect open > source development should be encouraged. If you only want to see stuff > relating to SnowGlobe then either encourage LL create a snowglobe-dev list > or configure your mail filters to only allow email related to snowglobe to > enter your inbox from this list. I agree, very important topics have been banging around here recently that effect all opensource work with the Linden Labs code and secondlife itsself, that said is there a call for a seperate snowglobe-dev list? I certainly don't want to see this list change much and it should stay a general opensource/secondlife type list but it may be worth a list to focus specificly on snowglobe only topics? Robin From dzonatas at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 07:17:53 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 07:17:53 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Ironpython (was: Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC5CE91.5020106@gmail.com> Compare this list to here: http://lists.ironpython.com/pipermail/users-ironpython.com Although stated as a combined user/dev list and open to related DLR/CLR discussion...: http://lists.ironpython.com/listinfo.cgi/users-ironpython.com ... the signal to noise, on that mail-list, remains much more on the signal side, and it commonly gets more unmoderated traffic than this opensource-dev list. And yes, I brought up ironpython with a shameless plug that Ironpython 2.6 is almost in Debian stable. If anyone has done AST & resource compiles with ironpython probably has hacked their compile to include the entire standard python lib into a single exe, which makes it very easily shippable product with no install complexity for platforms that support Mono/.NET. It would be nice if something like CMake was written in a DLR instead of native, so then any updates to CMake wouldn't need to wait to move out of the experimental cycles of the platforms in order to compile to stable (like Debian Lenny, for example). Also note the potential pluggability of IL/DLR... Ron Festa wrote: > I feel your frustration, however, this is the /*opensource-dev*/ > mailing list *not* the /*snowglobe-dev*/ mailing list. Both SnowGlobe > and TPV's are open source viewers based on Linden Lab's mainline > viewer the only difference is Snowglobe is distributed by LL. > Discussion on policies that effect open source development should be > encouraged. If you only want to see stuff relating to SnowGlobe then > either encourage LL create a snowglobe-dev list or configure your mail > filters to only allow email related to snowglobe to enter your inbox > from this list. > > Ron Festa > Virtual Worlds Admin > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Jonathan Irvin > wrote: > > To Whom It May Concern: > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the > recent influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to > the development of the SnowGlobe viewer.? Lately, when I open my > email, I get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the > recent changes for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that > this is not related to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions > are not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to > this specific topic? > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like. > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I > bet those who are truly interested in the opensource development > of the Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here > rather than wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL > and the TPVP lets get together and share our misery post". > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > Jonathan Irvin > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From soft at lindenlab.com Wed Apr 14 08:38:44 2010 From: soft at lindenlab.com (Soft Linden) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 08:38:44 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: I don't know the details on this, however it's definitely off topic for this list. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:28 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Hey all, > > just got this notecard inworld: > > "Hello. > > You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane > and Scarlett Vielle. > Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to > manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". From jamey at beau.org Wed Apr 14 08:39:44 2010 From: jamey at beau.org (Jamey Fletcher) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:39:44 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <4BC5E1C0.3060909@beau.org> Lance Corrimal wrote: > ... is that guy out of his mind? Yes. See notes below. > You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial > Foulsbane and Scarlett Vielle. Somehow you are a victim of his False > DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to manipulate LL into killing off > his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". There was discussion of this "Emerald Speed Rez" at one of the previous Emerald Office Hours - as the same effect can be implemented with a short series of chats (short enough, quite a few don't bother putting it in as a gesture), it's highly unlikely he's actually doing anything of note. I believe the Emerald Devs said they weren't going to include a feature of that nature to automatically take effect after teleports, as it actually increases the load on the server by a fair amount. > If you would like to join the defendants against this > paperwork-greifer in a counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL > name and anything else at primeinx at gmail.com > Do not be scared This is certainly true enough. > 1) Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected > copyright from the moment they made anything. (The US copyright > office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue free > copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) > 2) There is no copyright registered in the united states: > http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First In fact, copyright of a work does take place at creation, and does not require filing with the Library of Congress. However, to be awarded punitive damages in a lawsuit, said filing must take place - but actual damages may still be asked for. Just that actual damages is far harder to prove. IANAL, but this has been hashed out in the broader computer community for some time. > 3) Linden Labs cannot be sued. Yet he filed against them. Linden Labs can in fact be sued. Nothing stops that. Only governments can claim sovereign immunity from courts that are under their authority. Ergo, the US Government must consent to be sued in federal, state or local courts, states may be sued in the Federal Courts, but must consent to being sued in their state courts, or in subsidiary local courts. And so forth. Again, IANAL, if it's really important, contact your own legal advisor. > 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. This may simply be that these are copies of his copies - the controlling paperwork would be the original copies actually on file with the appropriate court. However, it does sound rather bogus. > 5) He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he > cannot copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". Correct - copyright does not apply to single words. Trademarks *can*, however, the Emerald Devs would have a much better claim. It would be rather funny, if he did in fact get a trademark on Emerald, since the Emerald viewer would need to get a new name, which would lead to his "Emerald Speed Rez" not having an Emerald viewer to work in! > He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. At least he learned it from the Big Guys, like the MPAA and the RIAA. This is why the DMCA is so bogus. > If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. Lets > create a group and fight him off shall we? I'd say just ignore it - the bogosity is so strong, it'll collapse into a black bogosphere from which no sanity can escape. From lear.cale at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 08:46:06 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:46:06 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: FYI, Whoever wrote this is ignorant of US copyright and trademark law. In the US (and most countries), you have an implicit copyright whenver you render an original work in any fixed medium. I.e., if you sing a song you made up, no implicit copyright, but if you record it or write it down, you do get one. "Work" here means "work of an author". A copyright does not have to be registered to be valid. It does have to be registered to file suit; failure to register before publication means you can still collect damages but not "statutory damages and attorneys' fees". If subsequent posts are correct for what this is about, copyrights don't apply anyway. Also, you can't copyright a name. You use trademarks to protect a name. So just be warned that there's a lot of bullshit going on here, on both sides of the fence. IANAL but I do know a little about copyright law. You can verify these facts at http://www.copyright.gov . Jeff On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Hey all, > > just got this notecard inworld: > > "Hello. > > You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane > and Scarlett Vielle. > Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to > manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". > > If you would like to join the defendants against this paperwork-greifer in a > counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL name and anything else at > primeinx at gmail.com > > Do not be scared > 1) ?Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected copyright > from the moment they made anything. > (The US copyright office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue > free copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) > > 2) ?There is no copyright registered in the united states: > http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First > > 3) ?Linden Labs cannot be sued. ?Yet he filed against them. > > 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. > > 5) ?He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he cannot > copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". > > He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. > > If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. > Lets create a group and fight him off shall we? > > zFire" > > > ... is that guy out of his mind? > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From lear.cale at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 08:53:54 2010 From: lear.cale at gmail.com (Lear Cale) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:53:54 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: Another point: A copyright means you can't copy the work. You are allowed to come up with the same idea yourself and arrive at a simiar result. It requires a patent to protect against that. Furthermore, DMCA applies only when the original work is *digitally* copied. It does *NOT* apply to a forger painting a duplicate of someone else's work. That falls under normal copyright law. If you didn't bypass copyright protection mechanisms to duplicate the original, it's not a DMCA violation. LL may use received DMCA filings for purposes other than the intent of DMCA, though -- that's their issue. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Lear Cale wrote: > FYI, Whoever wrote this is ignorant of US copyright and trademark law. > ?In the US (and most countries), you have an implicit copyright > whenver you render an original work in any fixed medium. ?I.e., if you > sing a song you made up, no implicit copyright, but if you record it > or write it down, you do get one. ?"Work" here means "work of an > author". > > A copyright does not have to be registered to be valid. ?It does have > to be registered to file suit; failure to register before publication > means you can still collect damages but not "statutory damages and > attorneys' fees". > > If subsequent posts are correct for what this is about, copyrights > don't apply anyway. > > Also, you can't copyright a name. ?You use trademarks to protect a name. > > So just be warned that there's a lot of bullshit going on here, on > both sides of the fence. > > IANAL but I do know a little about copyright law. ?You can verify > these facts at http://www.copyright.gov . > > Jeff > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 4:28 AM, Lance Corrimal > wrote: >> Hey all, >> >> just got this notecard inworld: >> >> "Hello. >> >> You are reading this because you were listed in a lawsuit by Belial Foulsbane >> and Scarlett Vielle. >> Somehow you are a victim of his False DMCA claims, and his ongoing effort to >> manipulate LL into killing off his competition for the "Emerald Speed Rez". >> >> If you would like to join the defendants against this paperwork-greifer in a >> counter lawsuit please contact me with your SL name and anything else at >> primeinx at gmail.com >> >> Do not be scared >> 1) ?Scarlett Vielle claimed that they automaticly had a protected copyright >> from the moment they made anything. >> (The US copyright office is not aware of every creation in SL, does not issue >> free copyrights, and does not issue anything without a proper filing) >> >> 2) ?There is no copyright registered in the united states: >> http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?DB=local&PAGE=First >> >> 3) ?Linden Labs cannot be sued. ?Yet he filed against them. >> >> 4) The judges signature on his legal papers he faxed to LL is blank. >> >> 5) ?He cannot copyright the word "Emerald" for the same reason he cannot >> copyright the word "SecondLife" or "Microsoft". >> >> He is a paperwork bully filing false DMCA claims as you know. >> >> If you have any ideas to stop this madman, do please share them. >> Lets create a group and fight him off shall we? >> >> zFire" >> >> >> ... is that guy out of his mind? >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 09:02:43 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:02:43 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces, that they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion doesn't mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to discussion, just as there's no use continuing TPV development. On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > To Whom It May Concern: > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this > specific topic? > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like. > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet > those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets > get together and share our misery post". > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > Jonathan Irvin > SL Resident of 5 Years. > _______________________________________________ > 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 From joe at lindenlab.com Wed Apr 14 09:27:36 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:27:36 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: Rob, I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? -- Joe On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces, that > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion doesn't > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to discussion, just as > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent > > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my email, I > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this > > specific topic? > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or > > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like. > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet > > those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/7f24c1f5/attachment.htm From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 09:33:11 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 09:33:11 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <1271262791.19229.3.camel@RAGE> Yes, I begin sleep at 6:00AM and frequently sleep until 2:30PM. On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > Rob, > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > -- Joe > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson > wrote: > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our > faces, that > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion > doesn't > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to discussion, > just as > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to > the recent > > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to > the > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my > email, I > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent > changes > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is > not related > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions > to a > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development > questions are > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related > to this > > specific topic? > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already > impersonated or > > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not > like. > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another > forum, I bet > > those who are truly interested in the opensource development > of the > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here > rather than > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the > TPVP lets > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > From antoniusmisfit at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 09:35:26 2010 From: antoniusmisfit at gmail.com (Tony Agudo) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:35:26 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: Joe, is there a transcript/voice recording of the meeting available? On Apr 14, 2010 12:27 PM, "Joe Linden" wrote: Rob, I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? -- Joe On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > > It's already... _______________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/50847404/attachment.htm From mike.dickson at hp.com Wed Apr 14 09:35:47 2010 From: mike.dickson at hp.com (Michael Dickson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:35:47 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 16:27 +0000, 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 From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Wed Apr 14 09:39:26 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:39:26 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <201004141839.35195.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Joe, have a beer ;) or would you rather have a gallon of WD40? ;) Am Mittwoch 14 April 2010 schrieb Joe Linden: > Rob, > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > -- Joe > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces, > > that they are not going to change the policy, meaning our > > opinion doesn't mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing > > to discussion, just as there's no use continuing TPV > > development. > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the > > > recent influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated > > > to the development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I > > > open my email, I get 5-10 different topics and responses daily > > > to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer policy and I > > > feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related > > > development at all. > > > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development > > > questions are not lost in the flames, complaints, and > > > discussions related to this specific topic? > > > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated > > > or which part of the third party viewer policy they do not > > > like. > > > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I > > > bet those who are truly interested in the opensource > > > development of the Second Life viewer would be more in tuned > > > to staying here rather than wake up to read yet another > > > unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and > > > share our misery post". > > > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 From sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch Wed Apr 14 09:46:39 2010 From: sllists at boroon.dasgupta.ch (Boroondas Gupte) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:46:39 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] TPVp brownbag meeting transcript from 2010-04-13 (was: Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list) In-Reply-To: <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <4BC5F16F.7000006@boroon.dasgupta.ch> On 04/14/2010 06:35 PM, Michael Dickson wrote: > Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not > attend? > https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/AW_Groupies/Chat_Logs/JoeLindenTPVBrownbag-2010-04-13 (Thanks Latha!) From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 10:03:54 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 19:03:54 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 trunk binaries available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20100414190354.6fe548c9.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> On Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:49:03 -0700 "Philippe (Merov) Bossut" wrote: > Linux: > http://secondlife.com/developers/opensource/downloads/2010/trunk/3318/Snowglobe-i686-2.0.0.3318.tar.bz2 don't start... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::createContext: Stencil Bits 8 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::initExtensions: initExtensions() checking shell variables to adjust features... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::initExtensions: initExtensions() FramebufferObject-related procs... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::initExtensions: initExtensions() OcclusionQuery-related procs... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::initExtensions: initExtensions() PointParameters-related procs... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::initExtensions: initExtensions() VertexShader-related procs... 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z WARNING: LLError::NoClassInfo::addFeature: LLFeatureList::Attempting to add preexisting feature Disregard128DefaultDrawDistance 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::loadGPUClass: GPU is NVIDIA GTX 270 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::applyBaseMasks: Setting GPU Class to Class3 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::applyRecommendedSettings: Applying Recommended Features 2010-04-14T17:02:57Z INFO: LLError::NoClassInfo::applyBaseMasks: Setting GPU Class to Class3 Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x09220b1a in LLImageGL::setCategory(int) () (gdb) anyone else before fill a jira? From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 10:23:22 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 10:23:22 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <1271265802.19229.7.camel@RAGE> I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of my concerns. [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS ^ That was all I needed to hear. Debate's effectively over. On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > Rob, > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > -- Joe > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson > wrote: > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our > faces, that > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion > doesn't > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to discussion, > just as > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to > the recent > > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to > the > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when I open my > email, I > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent > changes > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is > not related > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions > to a > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development > questions are > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related > to this > > specific topic? > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already > impersonated or > > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not > like. > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another > forum, I bet > > those who are truly interested in the opensource development > of the > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here > rather than > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the > TPVP lets > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > From secret.argent at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 11:03:56 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 13:03:56 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit? In-Reply-To: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <201004141028.56286.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <68D47AB7-32C5-449F-9B3E-8146CA065504@gmail.com> I suggest you read up on how copyright law in the US actually works. You seem to be under the impression that the changes in 1989 when the US implemented most of the Berne Convention never happened. I'm not commenting on the validity of this unsupported notecard, just noting that you're mistaken in some of your beliefs about copyright. From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 11:33:01 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:33:01 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271265802.19229.7.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights. We've been over this already. And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it. I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit" comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any further OSS development work from me. On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote: > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name. > > > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested. > > > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as > that is. > > > If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some of us can > deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference seems to > be the biggest problem for you. > > > Ron Festa > Virtual Worlds Admin > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson > wrote: > I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of > my > concerns. > > [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of > internal debate > around cost/benefit of OS > > ^ That was all I needed to hear. Debate's effectively over. > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > > > > Rob, > > > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > > > -- Joe > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson > > wrote: > > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, > to our > > faces, that > > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our > opinion > > doesn't > > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to > discussion, > > just as > > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin > wrote: > > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this > inquiry due to > > the recent > > > influx of new topic related...or should I say > unrelated to > > the > > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when > I open my > > email, I > > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to > the recent > > changes > > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that > this is > > not related > > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these > discussions > > to a > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource > development > > questions are > > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and > discussions related > > to this > > > specific topic? > > > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk > about which > > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already > > impersonated or > > > which part of the third party viewer policy they > do not > > like. > > > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to > another > > forum, I bet > > > those who are truly interested in the opensource > development > > of the > > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to > staying here > > rather than > > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate > LL and the > > TPVP lets > > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > 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 > > > From joe at lindenlab.com Wed Apr 14 11:49:59 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 11:49:59 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271265802.19229.7.camel@RAGE> <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual words I said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that quote: "* **we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a successful program*." Was it infuriating that we have internal debates from time to time on how we staff our projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling our efforts in many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful project for the OS community than it has been in the past? I was actually making a comment that we've not done this very well to date (in fact, we've sucked at it), and we're committed to many changes to improve the situation. Either way, we're sorry to see you go. -- joe On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson wrote: > And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights. We've been over this > already. And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I > can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it. > > I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both > the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit" > comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any > further OSS development work from me. > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote: > > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your > > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I > > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility > > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name. > > > > > > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of > > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP > > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to > > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less > > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested. > > > > > > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law > > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft > > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as > > that is. > > > > > > If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some of us can > > deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference seems to > > be the biggest problem for you. > > > > > > Ron Festa > > Virtual Worlds Admin > > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson > > wrote: > > I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of > > my > > concerns. > > > > [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of > > internal debate > > around cost/benefit of OS > > > > ^ That was all I needed to hear. Debate's effectively over. > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > > > > > > > Rob, > > > > > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > > > > > -- Joe > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson > > > wrote: > > > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, > > to our > > > faces, that > > > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our > > opinion > > > doesn't > > > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to > > discussion, > > > just as > > > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin > > wrote: > > > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this > > inquiry due to > > > the recent > > > > influx of new topic related...or should I say > > unrelated to > > > the > > > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when > > I open my > > > email, I > > > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to > > the recent > > > changes > > > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that > > this is > > > not related > > > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these > > discussions > > > to a > > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource > > development > > > questions are > > > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and > > discussions related > > > to this > > > > specific topic? > > > > > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk > > about which > > > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already > > > impersonated or > > > > which part of the third party viewer policy they > > do not > > > like. > > > > > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to > > another > > > forum, I bet > > > > those who are truly interested in the opensource > > development > > > of the > > > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to > > staying here > > > rather than > > > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate > > LL and the > > > TPVP lets > > > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/d5bd5cbe/attachment-0001.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Wed Apr 14 16:28:17 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 16:28:17 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Login response request/processing in 1.23 vsSnowglobe / 2.0 In-Reply-To: <65EC42063AAD4DDFA7144DB761D9A0EB@panther> References: <1FC6FF30A74A46A3B306526E0FEDDD19@panther> <65EC42063AAD4DDFA7144DB761D9A0EB@panther> Message-ID: Hi Kitty, On Fri, Apr 9, 2010 at 2:42 PM, Kitty wrote: > Found a likely cause... > > Viewer 2.0 (and Snowglobe) isn't requesting a gzipped response from the > login server which causes the login reply to take much, much longer to > download than it does with 1.23. > > Is there any chance someone forget to build libcurl with zlib? > > Good call! It's filed under https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/EXT-6813 Brad's working on it. Thanks for pointing this out. Very much appreciated :) Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100414/276fd148/attachment.htm From vrhacks at gmail.com Wed Apr 14 18:08:31 2010 From: vrhacks at gmail.com (VR Hacks) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:08:31 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> Message-ID: <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> Michael wrote in part: > Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not > attend? I see someone has already posted a link to the full chat text transcript on the wiki. Gareth Nelson was kind enough to provide the voice recording of the meeting, which can be found here: http://bit.ly/TPVPbrownBag1 You can also access it via our vrhacks channel on iTunes. Hth! Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde From aleric.inglewood at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 05:13:14 2010 From: aleric.inglewood at gmail.com (Aleric Inglewood) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:13:14 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271265802.19229.7.camel@RAGE> <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: I thought it would make more sense (I still have hope) to say this now, and not wait till 30 April. Also I have decided that Linden Lab does not deserve the 40 hours per week that I spend volunteering on the snowglobe sources. Lately I have done less because my motivation was gone due to the policy, and there has been a long break because I suffer from something like carpel tunnel, but over all I DO spend that amount of time on a project that I am devoted to. If the TPV policy is not going to address FULLY that any open source developers remain completely free of liability as stated in the GPL license [to recap: [...] THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU [the user]. SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION. [...] IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW [...] WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. ] Because of the parts in the [...] it may or may not be POSSIBLE to make developers liable through the TPV policy, I don't care. I don't want to run the risk that the TPV makes me liable, so it should not contain any words that could be interpreted as such. I am sorry to say that I doubt that this will come to a resolution, because Joe already has said that he can only take SMALL changes and is not looking for a rewrite. He also said that he can only take it to the lawyers, but he has no power to actually enforce anything, it is not up to him. I will probably start maintaining another TPV specifically for some opengrid grid. The REASON I wanted to work on Snowglobe is because I believe that all open source projects are equal. We are not competitors (some devs of certain TPV(s) might take that to heart). I wanted to work there where my bug fixes and improvements would benefit all. But exactly for that reason I cannot standby when other open source projects that derive from Snowglobe are bullied into termination of their project and/or are forced to give up the freedom to make their own decisions, the only benefit of being an OS dev. Sad, Aleric Inglewood On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Joe Linden wrote: > For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual words > I said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that quote: "* **we've > had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and we're > fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a successful > program*." Was it infuriating that we have internal debates from time to > time on how we staff our projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling > our efforts in many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful > project for the OS community than it has been in the past? I was actually > making a comment that we've not done this very well to date (in fact, we've > sucked at it), and we're committed to many changes to improve the situation. > > Either way, we're sorry to see you go. > > -- joe > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson > wrote: > >> And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights. We've been over this >> already. And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I >> can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it. >> >> I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both >> the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit" >> comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any >> further OSS development work from me. >> >> >> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote: >> > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your >> > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I >> > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility >> > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name. >> > >> > >> > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of >> > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP >> > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to >> > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less >> > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested. >> > >> > >> > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law >> > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft >> > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as >> > that is. >> > >> > >> > If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some of us can >> > deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference seems to >> > be the biggest problem for you. >> > >> > >> > Ron Festa >> > Virtual Worlds Admin >> > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University >> > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY >> > Phone: 732-474-8583 >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson >> > wrote: >> > I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of >> > my >> > concerns. >> > >> > [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of >> > internal debate >> > around cost/benefit of OS >> > >> > ^ That was all I needed to hear. Debate's effectively over. >> > >> > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: >> > >> > >> > > Rob, >> > > >> > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? >> > > >> > > -- Joe >> > > >> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson >> > > wrote: >> > > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, >> > to our >> > > faces, that >> > > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our >> > opinion >> > > doesn't >> > > mean diddly to them. There's no use continuing to >> > discussion, >> > > just as >> > > there's no use continuing TPV development. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin >> > wrote: >> > > > To Whom It May Concern: >> > > > >> > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this >> > inquiry due to >> > > the recent >> > > > influx of new topic related...or should I say >> > unrelated to >> > > the >> > > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. Lately, when >> > I open my >> > > email, I >> > > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to >> > the recent >> > > changes >> > > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that >> > this is >> > > not related >> > > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. >> > > > >> > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these >> > discussions >> > > to a >> > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource >> > development >> > > questions are >> > > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and >> > discussions related >> > > to this >> > > > specific topic? >> > > > >> > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk >> > about which >> > > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already >> > > impersonated or >> > > > which part of the third party viewer policy they >> > do not >> > > like. >> > > > >> > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to >> > another >> > > forum, I bet >> > > > those who are truly interested in the opensource >> > development >> > > of the >> > > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to >> > staying here >> > > rather than >> > > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate >> > LL and the >> > > TPVP lets >> > > > get together and share our misery post". >> > > > >> > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, >> > > > >> > > > Jonathan Irvin >> > > > SL Resident of 5 Years. >> > > >> > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ >> > > > 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 >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/453705f4/attachment-0001.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 07:05:33 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:05:33 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271265802.19229.7.camel@RAGE> <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <4BC71D2D.8090208@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 some TPVs might be released under licenses that do assign responsibilities, legal liabilities etc to developers and/or distributers, the TPVP shouldn't attempt to override any license applied to any TPV On 15/4/2010 09:13, Aleric Inglewood wrote: > I thought it would make more sense (I still have hope) to say this now, > and not wait till 30 April. > > Also I have decided that Linden Lab does not deserve the 40 hours > per week that I spend volunteering on the snowglobe sources. > Lately I have done less because my motivation was gone due to > the policy, and there has been a long break because I suffer from > something like carpel tunnel, but over all I DO spend that amount > of time on a project that I am devoted to. > > If the TPV policy is not going to address FULLY that any open source > developers remain completely free of liability as stated in the GPL > license > > [to recap: > > [...] THE ENTIRE RISK AS > TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU [the user]. > SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL > NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION. > > [...] IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW [...] > WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR > REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES, > INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING > OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED > TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY > YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER > PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE > POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES. > > ] > > Because of the parts in the [...] it may or may not be POSSIBLE to make > developers > liable through the TPV policy, I don't care. I don't want to run the > risk that the TPV > makes me liable, so it should not contain any words that could be > interpreted > as such. > > I am sorry to say that I doubt that this will come to a resolution, > because Joe already > has said that he can only take SMALL changes and is not looking for a > rewrite. He also > said that he can only take it to the lawyers, but he has no power to > actually enforce > anything, it is not up to him. > > I will probably start maintaining another TPV specifically for some > opengrid grid. > > The REASON I wanted to work on Snowglobe is because I believe that all open > source projects are equal. We are not competitors (some devs of certain > TPV(s) > might take that to heart). I wanted to work there where my bug fixes and > improvements would benefit all. But exactly for that reason I cannot standby > when other open source projects that derive from Snowglobe are bullied into > termination of their project and/or are forced to give up the freedom to > make > their own decisions, the only benefit of being an OS dev. > > Sad, > Aleric Inglewood > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Joe Linden > wrote: > > For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual > words I said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that > quote: "/ //we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit > of OS //... and we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment > to make this a successful program/." Was it infuriating that we > have internal debates from time to time on how we staff our > projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling our efforts in > many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful project for > the OS community than it has been in the past? I was actually > making a comment that we've not done this very well to date (in > fact, we've sucked at it), and we're committed to many changes to > improve the situation. > > Either way, we're sorry to see you go. > > -- joe > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson > > > wrote: > > And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights. We've been > over this > already. And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only > thing I > can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy > about it. > > I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, > but both > the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit" > comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not > deserve any > further OSS development work from me. > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote: > > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your > > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me > if I > > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was > compatibility > > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name. > > > > > > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up > most of > > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP > > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly > according to > > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never > the less > > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested. > > > > > > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court > of law > > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because > Microsoft > > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as > stupid as > > that is. > > > > > > If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some > of us can > > deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference > seems to > > be the biggest problem for you. > > > > > > Ron Festa > > Virtual Worlds Admin > > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University > > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY > > Phone: 732-474-8583 > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson > > > wrote: > > I decided to read the transcript and it did not > address any of > > my > > concerns. > > > > [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of > > internal debate > > around cost/benefit of OS > > > > ^ That was all I needed to hear. Debate's effectively > over. > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote: > > > > > > > Rob, > > > > > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday? > > > > > > -- Joe > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson > > > > wrote: > > > It's already reached a point where LL has > told us, > > to our > > > faces, that > > > they are not going to change the policy, > meaning our > > opinion > > > doesn't > > > mean diddly to them. There's no use > continuing to > > discussion, > > > just as > > > there's no use continuing TPV development. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan > Irvin > > wrote: > > > > To Whom It May Concern: > > > > > > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this > > inquiry due to > > > the recent > > > > influx of new topic related...or should I say > > unrelated to > > > the > > > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer. > Lately, when > > I open my > > > email, I > > > > get 5-10 different topics and responses > daily to > > the recent > > > changes > > > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I > feel that > > this is > > > not related > > > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all. > > > > > > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these > > discussions > > > to a > > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource > > development > > > questions are > > > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and > > discussions related > > > to this > > > > specific topic? > > > > > > > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to > talk > > about which > > > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were > already > > > impersonated or > > > > which part of the third party viewer > policy they > > do not > > > like. > > > > > > > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to > > another > > > forum, I bet > > > > those who are truly interested in the > opensource > > development > > > of the > > > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to > > staying here > > > rather than > > > > wake up to read yet another unproductive > "I hate > > LL and the > > > TPVP lets > > > > get together and share our misery post". > > > > > > > > Respectfully & Best Regards, > > > > > > > > Jonathan Irvin > > > > SL Resident of 5 Years. > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHHQsACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUIugCfQPRZuC5NNyZoXA9ywIoL1ja1 IcgAn2xU38G5TKplSRpVfqpwFyUckUJt =qc0G -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de Thu Apr 15 07:09:19 2010 From: Lance.Corrimal at eregion.de (Lance Corrimal) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:09:19 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> Message-ID: <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 20:49:59 schrieb Joe Linden: > **we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and > we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a > successful program*." then... how about... opensourcing the SERVER (like someone pretty high up suggested several years ago)? and there's no reason to be afraid that giving away the other half of the software would cause you longtime harm anyways... ...after all, the grid is more than server & client. the grid also is all those boxes that it is running on... no way that a competitior could pull 10000 PCs out of a hat on short notice. on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following predictions: - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber service. - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed - a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe. imagine the possibilities. bye, LC From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 15 08:01:15 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:01:15 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the start was missing On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:08 AM, VR Hacks wrote: > Michael wrote in part: > >> Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not >> attend? > > I see someone has already posted a link to the full chat text transcript on > the wiki. > > Gareth Nelson was kind enough to provide the voice recording of the meeting, > which can be found here: > > http://bit.ly/TPVPbrownBag1 > > You can also access it via our vrhacks channel on iTunes. Hth! > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From robertltux at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 08:28:00 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:28:00 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the > start was missing > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client crashing or ... anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing bugs in said code so LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to either LLC or TP code) -- Robert L Martin * said liability is limited to fixing code and cost of replacement of damaged "goods" in the case of inventory loss or damage to a region ** said liability is limited to fixing code unless the code can be shown to be deliberately unfit for purpose or otherwise illegal according to local state or federal law (local to include the LL TOS as currently amended). From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 08:42:17 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:42:17 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or distribute On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the >> start was missing >> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client > crashing or ... > > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing > bugs in said code so > > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to > either LLC or TP code) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm =t1M5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 08:47:51 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 11:47:51 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> Message-ID: It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever protections you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not explicit in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract between you and LL. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes < tigrospottystripes at gmail.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of > GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or > distribute > > On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson > wrote: > >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the > >> start was missing > >> > > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. > > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links > > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client > > crashing or ... > > > > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not > > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing > > bugs in said code so > > > > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* > > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** > > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to > > either LLC or TP code) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV > jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm > =t1M5 > -----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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/84e4ca2e/attachment.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 15 08:57:33 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:57:33 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> Message-ID: The problem with that is a contract requires assent on both sides On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: > It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever protections > you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV > asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not explicit > in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract > between you and LL. > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes > wrote: >> >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of >> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or >> distribute >> >> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote: >> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson >> > wrote: >> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the >> >> start was missing >> >> >> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. >> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links >> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client >> > crashing or ... >> > >> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not >> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing >> > bugs in said code so >> > >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to >> > either LLC or TP code) >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ >> >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV >> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm >> =t1M5 >> -----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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 09:40:11 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:40:11 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> Message-ID: "Many coders would likely accept liability when being paid well, or possibly at all. But in the case of open source code created as a hobby, the GPL idea of no warranty has so far been successful in the community because code can be inspected by its users, and because the users can verify, alter, and fix any problems in it on their own, so they shouldn't claim fault on the developer when it was their own choice to use the code. However, in LL's case, they don't even get to choose whether they use your code. Anyone can basically force it upon their service to feel the effects of using arbitrary viewer code. Thus, since there is no choice, ultimately some liability is inherent." Basically, consent does agree on both sides. LL is forced into the situation by the nature of their service, and starting April 30th, developers consent as well, if they wish to use the service. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote: > The problem with that is a contract requires assent on both sides > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Discrete Dreamscape > wrote: > > It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever > protections > > you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV > > asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not > explicit > > in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract > > between you and LL. > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes > > wrote: > >> > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of > >> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or > >> distribute > >> > >> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote: > >> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson > >> > wrote: > >> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the > >> >> start was missing > >> >> > >> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY. > >> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links > >> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client > >> > crashing or ... > >> > > >> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not > >> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing > >> > bugs in said code so > >> > > >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* > >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** > >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to > >> > either LLC or TP code) > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > >> > >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV > >> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm > >> =t1M5 > >> -----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 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > > > > -- > ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for > everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - > Printcrime by Cory Doctrow > > Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. > See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/33d990e4/attachment.htm From vrhacks at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 12:38:09 2010 From: vrhacks at gmail.com (VR Hacks) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:38:09 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE><1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local><3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA><4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> Imo, some people fail to see the TPVp for what it is. To wit: A) Any and all developers who develop a client for connecting to the second life grid must adhere to a basic set of rules. To reiterate, the TPV policy does not just apply to devs extending the lab's code base. To wit: "This Policy governs access to Second Life and our technical platform that supports Second Life by any Third-Party Viewer, by which we mean any third-party software client, regardless of its source code, that logs into our servers. This includes software for viewing Second Life, any chat clients, utilities, bots, and proxies as well as applications that may not be listed in our Viewer Directory." (http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php , paragraph two) In other words, should I decide to write a "from scratch" viewer to access the grid, then I must code my viewer such that it adheres to their TPV policy. B) Any developer who develops and/or distributes their viewer is "responsible" (please note the operative word, responsible) for whatever code they've implemented. In other words, it is up to them to a) debug their own code, b) write their own EULA, and c) define & implement a user support model. Should they choose to do none of the above, that is their choice, as well. Otherwise put, responsible and smart coders will *always* include a EULA with their binary distribution (regardless of whether or not it was designed to connect to the grid). Why? Because it sets end user expectation. It ensures you, as devs, will not end up in a infinite "support for free" loop, and importantly, it provides legal protection should your code have a bug that you did not catch. As for the GPL argument. That is moot. Or rather, as Joe so noted, "The TPV is orthogonal to the GPL." That being said and all things considered, imo, the lab has been quite magnanimous when it comes to third party viewer devs. After all, they are not required to provide "free advertising" via TPV directory that is designed to set a bar for inclusion, which in turn reduces the chance that the neils of this world will be able to include their viewer, while at the same time, increases consumer confidence in the viewers listed in that directory. Nor is the lab required to "pardon" people who had been previously banned such that same said may participate in the viewer directory program. Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 12:46:14 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:46:14 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE><1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local><3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA><4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? On 15/4/2010 16:38, VR Hacks wrote: > Imo, some people fail to see the TPVp for what it is. To wit: > > A) Any and all developers who develop a client for connecting to the second > life grid must adhere to a basic set of rules. To reiterate, the TPV policy > does not just apply to devs extending the lab's code base. To wit: > > "This Policy governs access to Second Life and our technical platform that > supports Second Life by any Third-Party Viewer, by which we mean any > third-party software client, regardless of its source code, that logs into > our servers. This includes software for viewing Second Life, any chat > clients, utilities, bots, and proxies as well as applications that may not > be listed in our Viewer Directory." (http://secondlife.com/corporate/tpv.php > , paragraph two) > > In other words, should I decide to write a "from scratch" viewer to access > the grid, then I must code my viewer such that it adheres to their TPV > policy. > > B) Any developer who develops and/or distributes their viewer is > "responsible" (please note the operative word, responsible) for whatever > code they've implemented. In other words, it is up to them to a) debug their > own code, b) write their own EULA, and c) define & implement a user support > model. Should they choose to do none of the above, that is their choice, as > well. > > Otherwise put, responsible and smart coders will *always* include a EULA > with their binary distribution (regardless of whether or not it was designed > to connect to the grid). Why? Because it sets end user expectation. It > ensures you, as devs, will not end up in a infinite "support for free" loop, > and importantly, it provides legal protection should your code have a bug > that you did not catch. > > As for the GPL argument. That is moot. Or rather, as Joe so noted, "The TPV > is orthogonal to the GPL." > > That being said and all things considered, imo, the lab has been quite > magnanimous when it comes to third party viewer devs. After all, they are > not required to provide "free advertising" via TPV directory that is > designed to set a bar for inclusion, which in turn reduces the chance that > the neils of this world will be able to include their viewer, while at the > same time, increases consumer confidence in the viewers listed in that > directory. Nor is the lab required to "pardon" people who had been > previously banned such that same said may participate in the viewer > directory program. > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHbQIACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUYjACghi9jjFMXd6CMJhEhAlVwW/0g iEkAoICmu4VZ6aT75M2U2UfkuypBV+M3 =D25i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From vrhacks at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 12:54:55 2010 From: vrhacks at gmail.com (VR Hacks) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 12:54:55 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE><1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local><3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA><4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> Tigro wrote: > What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and imo, it would still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary distribution. And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must retain said GPL with the souce code distribution. Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 12:58:06 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:58:06 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE><1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local><3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA><4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: > Tigro wrote: > >> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? > > Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and imo, it would > still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary distribution. > And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must retain said > GPL with the souce code distribution. > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHb8wACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWpPwCeMIV18rdRa3EPca4SGEAPENbm HU0An2JEkCBTgZ7mO7ccPACDcsswBHCa =yy0t -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:00:22 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:00:22 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> Message-ID: I would assume that, to be more detailed, your code would either not allow connections to the LL grid, or you would have to decline the updated ToS/TPVp, thus not agreeing to be bound to it but also preventing you from using the LL grid yourself. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Tigro Spottystripes < tigrospottystripes at gmail.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their > viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? > > On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: > > Tigro wrote: > > > >> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? > > > > Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and imo, it > would > > still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary > distribution. > > And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must retain > said > > GPL with the souce code distribution. > > > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > > MA Forensic Psychology > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > > -- > > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvHb8wACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWpPwCeMIV18rdRa3EPca4SGEAPENbm > HU0An2JEkCBTgZ7mO7ccPACDcsswBHCa > =yy0t > -----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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/e347c6f1/attachment.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:03:50 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:03:50 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? On 15/4/2010 17:00, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: > I would assume that, to be more detailed, your code would either not > allow connections to the LL grid, or you would have to decline the > updated ToS/TPVp, thus not agreeing to be bound to it but also > preventing you from using the LL grid yourself. > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Tigro Spottystripes > > wrote: > > So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their > viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? > > On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: >> Tigro wrote: > >>> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? > >> Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and > imo, it would >> still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary > distribution. >> And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must > retain said >> GPL with the souce code distribution. > >> Angela Talamasca (in-world) >> MA Forensic Psychology > >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog >> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter >> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube >> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap >> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient >> -- >> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are >> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar > Wilde > >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHcSEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXSNQCfdYb7Oshh7XjnJh8D3a+2UjGB uLcAniiljZlImaLgf2MBhyZWbQO/Hd42 =HZCv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:09:58 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:09:58 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> Message-ID: Devs for other grids that don't need to agree to LL's policy probably wouldn't have anything to worry about at all, especially if they included EULAs with the right terms. As for residents, I wouldn't say their account becomes 'unsafe.' However, my (emphasis on my) interpretation of the policy is that you would be "responsible" (read: liable) to LL for the results of your code. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Tigro Spottystripes < tigrospottystripes at gmail.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their > code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while > keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? > > On 15/4/2010 17:00, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: > > I would assume that, to be more detailed, your code would either not > > allow connections to the LL grid, or you would have to decline the > > updated ToS/TPVp, thus not agreeing to be bound to it but also > > preventing you from using the LL grid yourself. > > > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Tigro Spottystripes > > > > wrote: > > > > So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their > > viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? > > > > On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: > >> Tigro wrote: > > > >>> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? > > > >> Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and > > imo, it would > >> still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary > > distribution. > >> And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must > > retain said > >> GPL with the souce code distribution. > > > >> Angela Talamasca (in-world) > >> MA Forensic Psychology > > > >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > >> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > >> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > >> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > >> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > >> -- > >> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > >> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar > > Wilde > > > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvHcSEACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmXSNQCfdYb7Oshh7XjnJh8D3a+2UjGB > uLcAniiljZlImaLgf2MBhyZWbQO/Hd42 > =HZCv > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/c0d41230/attachment.htm From vrhacks at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:19:19 2010 From: vrhacks at gmail.com (VR Hacks) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 13:19:19 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> Tigro Spottystripes > Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their > code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while > keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? For argument's sake, let's say I, as an SL user, choose to extend the linden lab viewer code base to access, say, reaction grid. Let's also say that I do wish to agree to the TPV policy for my code. In other words, say, I want to include functionality that is allowable on that grid but not allowable on the SL grid. It is then my "responsibility" to create my viewer such that the option for connecting to the SL grid is not available without some sort of code change. At which point I can deploy my code. Of course, I still plan to access the second life grid. In order to do so, I cannot use my viewer. Rather, I must use a viewer that was developed by someone who agreed to the TPV policy (as put forth in the new ToS). In other words, as long as I am using a viewer that adheres to the TPV policy, all is well. And I can cavort in SL to my heart's content. This, of course, raises an interesting scenario. If I have coded a client that, say, ignores the lab's import/export requirements, and I have chosen to exclude SL grid access, yet, Joe Developer comes along and chooses to use my code base, and add in SL grid access, then the onus is upon Joe Developer to change the import/export feature to meet the TPV policy guidelines if he wants his viewer to connect to the grid. Or, he can take his chances. Nonetheless, since Joe Developer is the one who changed the code to connect to the grid, the policy applies to him., not to you. And therefore it is his responsibility to ensure his code adheres to the TPV policy. Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:31:56 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:31:56 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC777BC.5000908@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I don't think developers are gonna be happy with LL threatening to kill their accounts and bring them to court because of their non-SL related activities. IMO, LL should restrict their rules to only stuff done by connecting to their machines; so only actual users would be affected, and only for things users do while using LL's services. LL should not sue pencil makers because someone was stabbed with a pencil in their office. IMO the TPVp doesn't need to exist, and shouldn't. The TOS already had all the rules regarding unauthorized copying, misuse of LL's services etc, and in many cases, real world laws already existed to take care of things, the TOS didn't even have to mention the unlawful activities. For most things, LL should just have a friendly reminder for people to not break the law, and of course, LL should cooperate with law enforcement etc, and obey the laws themselves too of course. I know SL isn't a site (contrary to what many bloggers and even professional reporters seem to think), but i haven't heard of any site that offers some service that has their terms of service restricting which browsers users can use, much less try to blame browser makers for actions done by users. Summing up, forget thinking of things in terms of viewers, and forget developers, deal with users and their actions, and with the law. On 15/4/2010 17:09, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: > Devs for other grids that don't need to agree to LL's policy probably > wouldn't have anything to worry about at all, especially if they > included EULAs with the right terms. As for residents, I wouldn't say > their account becomes 'unsafe.' However, my (emphasis on my) > interpretation of the policy is that you would be "responsible" (read: > liable) to LL for the results of your code. > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:03 PM, Tigro Spottystripes > > wrote: > > Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their > code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while > keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? > > On 15/4/2010 17:00, Discrete Dreamscape wrote: >> I would assume that, to be more detailed, your code would either not >> allow connections to the LL grid, or you would have to decline the >> updated ToS/TPVp, thus not agreeing to be bound to it but also >> preventing you from using the LL grid yourself. > >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:58 PM, Tigro Spottystripes >> > >> wrote: > >> So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their >> viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? > >> On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: >>> Tigro wrote: > >>>> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? > >>> Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and >> imo, it would >>> still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary >> distribution. >>> And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must >> retain said >>> GPL with the souce code distribution. > >>> Angela Talamasca (in-world) >>> MA Forensic Psychology > >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog >>> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter >>> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube >>> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap >>> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient >>> -- >>> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are >>> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar >> Wilde > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHd7oACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWJZQCfWSfgO3cef9HrSnDjetK2vMyj 9YgAnir2RTRDzvBZrRa5D9BIVy9/yGUH =GTxu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:34:16 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:34:16 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <4BC77848.7000007@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 About that "interesting scenario", the TPVp doesn't seem to care about how many steps and hands separate the original code you did and what was used to generate the binary Joe Developer uses to log in SL. On 15/4/2010 17:19, VR Hacks wrote: > Tigro Spottystripes > >> Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their >> code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while >> keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? > > For argument's sake, let's say I, as an SL user, choose to extend the linden > lab viewer code base to access, say, reaction grid. Let's also say that I do > wish to agree to the TPV policy for my code. In other words, say, I want to > include functionality that is allowable on that grid but not allowable on > the SL grid. It is then my "responsibility" to create my viewer such that > the option for connecting to the SL grid is not available without some sort > of code change. At which point I can deploy my code. > > Of course, I still plan to access the second life grid. In order to do so, I > cannot use my viewer. Rather, I must use a viewer that was developed by > someone who agreed to the TPV policy (as put forth in the new ToS). In other > words, as long as I am using a viewer that adheres to the TPV policy, all is > well. And I can cavort in SL to my heart's content. > > This, of course, raises an interesting scenario. If I have coded a client > that, say, ignores the lab's import/export requirements, and I have chosen > to exclude SL grid access, yet, Joe Developer comes along and chooses to use > my code base, and add in SL grid access, then the onus is upon Joe Developer > to change the import/export feature to meet the TPV policy guidelines if he > wants his viewer to connect to the grid. Or, he can take his chances. > Nonetheless, since Joe Developer is the one who changed the code to connect > to the grid, the policy applies to him., not to you. And therefore it is his > responsibility to ensure his code adheres to the TPV policy. > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHeEYACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmW9BwCgjUIsETHVYQEuLZA7+NpquWYT +gUAn0I52NnLmxqkNOcZV3FMlNI55byb =nwmU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 13:39:23 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:39:23 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fwd: Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list Message-ID: <4BC7797B.7040708@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 (just bouncing back to the list) - -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:06:19 -0400 From: Michael Daniel To: Tigro Spottystripes IANAL, but that seems correct to me. The TPV policy does not regulate what people can and can not make on the internet. It is not a gag order preventing you from writing whatever code you like. From what I can tell, the policy just says that it is against TOS to run viewers that do X Y and Z. If you publish a viewer that is designed to connect to OS and it just happens to also connect to SL, that is not your problem. That is LL's problem. ~Bubblesort Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > So any developer not willing to abide by the TPVp can simply say their > viewer is not meant for LL's grid and that is it? > > On 15/4/2010 16:54, VR Hacks wrote: > >> Tigro wrote: > > >>> What if the developer develops a viewer for other grids? >>> >> Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and imo, it would >> still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary distribution. >> And, of course, if their code is extending GPL code, they must retain said >> GPL with the souce code distribution. > >> Angela Talamasca (in-world) >> MA Forensic Psychology > >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog >> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter >> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube >> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap >> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient >> -- >> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are >> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHeXgACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWLLACfTYACvJmfxpjidD3bQUmZg2vB 0wMAn1snuWz3FkIATVkmZhdnooQnSyYK =LvB0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From vrhacks at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 14:24:23 2010 From: vrhacks at gmail.com (VR Hacks) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:24:23 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> Message-ID: Michael wrote in part (full off-list comment is included below sig): > That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if > you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught > doing it then you will loose your account. Yup, something to that effect. > I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a > contract they made with you, can you? Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing it. So, if you choose to distribute that code that allows connection to the grid, and even if you included a "connect to the grid at your own risk" clause in your EULA, it could easily be shown in a court of law that you were attempting to circumvent the lab's TPV policy. In fact, if anything, such a clause in the EULA would clearly indicate that you know you're distributing a non-compliant viewer for connecting to the SL grid. Again, this would only apply if you provided a means for your viewer to connect to the SL grid. Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde Angela Talamasca (in-world) MA Forensic Psychology ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient -- "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde ----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Daniel" To: "VR Hacks" Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:38 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list >I know many others have looked at this, but to me the important part of the >policy is this: > > "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 > ." > > That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if > you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught > doing it then you will loose your account. > > If you don't want the liability just toss something in the EULA for your > users that makes them agree to not use your TPV to connect to SL and > you're covered, I think. I'm pretty sure that counts as due dilligance. > I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a > contract they made with you, can you? > > Again, I'm not a lawyer. > > ~Bubblesort > > > VR Hacks wrote: >> Tigro Spottystripes >> >> >>> Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their >>> code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while >>> keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? >>> >> >> For argument's sake, let's say I, as an SL user, choose to extend the >> linden lab viewer code base to access, say, reaction grid. Let's also say >> that I do wish to agree to the TPV policy for my code. In other words, >> say, I want to include functionality that is allowable on that grid but >> not allowable on the SL grid. It is then my "responsibility" to create my >> viewer such that the option for connecting to the SL grid is not >> available without some sort of code change. At which point I can deploy >> my code. >> >> Of course, I still plan to access the second life grid. In order to do >> so, I cannot use my viewer. Rather, I must use a viewer that was >> developed by someone who agreed to the TPV policy (as put forth in the >> new ToS). In other words, as long as I am using a viewer that adheres to >> the TPV policy, all is well. And I can cavort in SL to my heart's >> content. >> >> This, of course, raises an interesting scenario. If I have coded a client >> that, say, ignores the lab's import/export requirements, and I have >> chosen to exclude SL grid access, yet, Joe Developer comes along and >> chooses to use my code base, and add in SL grid access, then the onus is >> upon Joe Developer to change the import/export feature to meet the TPV >> policy guidelines if he wants his viewer to connect to the grid. Or, he >> can take his chances. Nonetheless, since Joe Developer is the one who >> changed the code to connect to the grid, the policy applies to him., not >> to you. And therefore it is his responsibility to ensure his code adheres >> to the TPV policy. >> >> Angela Talamasca (in-world) >> MA Forensic Psychology >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog >> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter >> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube >> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap >> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient >> -- >> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are >> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> > > > From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 14:41:18 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:41:18 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> Message-ID: <4BC787FE.6070103@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 What is considered malicious varies from grid to grid, someone could for example setup a grid for the sole purpose of figuring out how strong you can make a grid against attacks, and for the purpose of helping test it and find new possibilities of attacks, they could release an example client that has all sorts of means to attack other clients and even the grid itself so people have a base to develop on and know how things work currently etc. Or you could have a grid where the terms of service says only GPL content can be uploaded to the grid, and have the grid and the client enforce free copying and modifying (under the terms of GPL) of all the content. On 15/4/2010 18:24, VR Hacks wrote: > Michael wrote in part (full off-list comment is included below sig): > >> That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if >> you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught >> doing it then you will loose your account. > > Yup, something to that effect. > >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a >> contract they made with you, can you? > > Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing > it. So, if you choose to distribute that code that allows connection to the > grid, and even if you included a "connect to the grid at your own risk" > clause in your EULA, it could easily be shown in a court of law that you > were attempting to circumvent the lab's TPV policy. In fact, if anything, > such a clause in the EULA would clearly indicate that you know you're > distributing a non-compliant viewer for connecting to the SL grid. Again, > this would only apply if you provided a means for your viewer to connect to > the SL grid. > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Daniel" > To: "VR Hacks" > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:38 PM > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move > TPVPTopics to a different mailing list > > >> I know many others have looked at this, but to me the important part of the >> policy is this: >> >> "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 >> ." >> >> That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if >> you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught >> doing it then you will loose your account. >> >> If you don't want the liability just toss something in the EULA for your >> users that makes them agree to not use your TPV to connect to SL and >> you're covered, I think. I'm pretty sure that counts as due dilligance. >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a >> contract they made with you, can you? >> >> Again, I'm not a lawyer. >> >> ~Bubblesort >> >> >> VR Hacks wrote: >>> Tigro Spottystripes >>> >>> >>>> Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their >>>> code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while >>>> keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? >>>> >>> >>> For argument's sake, let's say I, as an SL user, choose to extend the >>> linden lab viewer code base to access, say, reaction grid. Let's also say >>> that I do wish to agree to the TPV policy for my code. In other words, >>> say, I want to include functionality that is allowable on that grid but >>> not allowable on the SL grid. It is then my "responsibility" to create my >>> viewer such that the option for connecting to the SL grid is not >>> available without some sort of code change. At which point I can deploy >>> my code. >>> >>> Of course, I still plan to access the second life grid. In order to do >>> so, I cannot use my viewer. Rather, I must use a viewer that was >>> developed by someone who agreed to the TPV policy (as put forth in the >>> new ToS). In other words, as long as I am using a viewer that adheres to >>> the TPV policy, all is well. And I can cavort in SL to my heart's >>> content. >>> >>> This, of course, raises an interesting scenario. If I have coded a client >>> that, say, ignores the lab's import/export requirements, and I have >>> chosen to exclude SL grid access, yet, Joe Developer comes along and >>> chooses to use my code base, and add in SL grid access, then the onus is >>> upon Joe Developer to change the import/export feature to meet the TPV >>> policy guidelines if he wants his viewer to connect to the grid. Or, he >>> can take his chances. Nonetheless, since Joe Developer is the one who >>> changed the code to connect to the grid, the policy applies to him., not >>> to you. And therefore it is his responsibility to ensure his code adheres >>> to the TPV policy. >>> >>> Angela Talamasca (in-world) >>> MA Forensic Psychology >>> >>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >>> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog >>> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter >>> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube >>> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap >>> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient >>> -- >>> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are >>> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvHh/wACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUsOACghaSDY163anYh3keS+MQNdUdk oFUAn3iA3OSOv2uhYxgdgDCuvJlqWCDu =Irc0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 14:52:00 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:52:00 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> Message-ID: These comments are beginning to seem rather like pure speculation. If you're concerned about your project or your liabilities, I recommend consulting with someone from LL or with your lawyer. Anyhow, the discussion at hand could use some more focus on what further modifications would be appreciated in the TPVp pending further discussions with Joe. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 5:24 PM, VR Hacks wrote: > Michael wrote in part (full off-list comment is included below sig): > > > That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if > > you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught > > doing it then you will loose your account. > > Yup, something to that effect. > > > I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a > > contract they made with you, can you? > > Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing > it. So, if you choose to distribute that code that allows connection to the > grid, and even if you included a "connect to the grid at your own risk" > clause in your EULA, it could easily be shown in a court of law that you > were attempting to circumvent the lab's TPV policy. In fact, if anything, > such a clause in the EULA would clearly indicate that you know you're > distributing a non-compliant viewer for connecting to the SL grid. Again, > this would only apply if you provided a means for your viewer to connect to > the SL grid. > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > > Angela Talamasca (in-world) > MA Forensic Psychology > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > -- > "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Michael Daniel" > To: "VR Hacks" > Sent: Thursday, April 15, 2010 1:38 PM > Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move > TPVPTopics to a different mailing list > > > >I know many others have looked at this, but to me the important part of > the > >policy is this: > > > > "This Policy does not place any restriction on modification or use of our > > viewer source code > > that we make available under the GPL > > < > http://secondlifegrid.net/technology-programs/license-virtual-world/viewerlicensing/gplv2 > >. > > 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 > > ." > > > > That means that you can write and distribute anything you please, but if > > you connect to the grid with something like NeilLife and you get caught > > doing it then you will loose your account. > > > > If you don't want the liability just toss something in the EULA for your > > users that makes them agree to not use your TPV to connect to SL and > > you're covered, I think. I'm pretty sure that counts as due dilligance. > > I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a > > contract they made with you, can you? > > > > Again, I'm not a lawyer. > > > > ~Bubblesort > > > > > > VR Hacks wrote: > >> Tigro Spottystripes > >> > >> > >>> Why developers for other grids would need to do any changes on their > >>> code? And why can't a SL resident develop clients for other grids while > >>> keeping their SL accounts safe without being forced to jump thru hoops? > >>> > >> > >> For argument's sake, let's say I, as an SL user, choose to extend the > >> linden lab viewer code base to access, say, reaction grid. Let's also > say > >> that I do wish to agree to the TPV policy for my code. In other words, > >> say, I want to include functionality that is allowable on that grid but > >> not allowable on the SL grid. It is then my "responsibility" to create > my > >> viewer such that the option for connecting to the SL grid is not > >> available without some sort of code change. At which point I can deploy > >> my code. > >> > >> Of course, I still plan to access the second life grid. In order to do > >> so, I cannot use my viewer. Rather, I must use a viewer that was > >> developed by someone who agreed to the TPV policy (as put forth in the > >> new ToS). In other words, as long as I am using a viewer that adheres to > >> the TPV policy, all is well. And I can cavort in SL to my heart's > >> content. > >> > >> This, of course, raises an interesting scenario. If I have coded a > client > >> that, say, ignores the lab's import/export requirements, and I have > >> chosen to exclude SL grid access, yet, Joe Developer comes along and > >> chooses to use my code base, and add in SL grid access, then the onus is > >> upon Joe Developer to change the import/export feature to meet the TPV > >> policy guidelines if he wants his viewer to connect to the grid. Or, he > >> can take his chances. Nonetheless, since Joe Developer is the one who > >> changed the code to connect to the grid, the policy applies to him., not > >> to you. And therefore it is his responsibility to ensure his code > adheres > >> to the TPV policy. > >> > >> Angela Talamasca (in-world) > >> MA Forensic Psychology > >> > >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > >> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog > >> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter > >> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube > >> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap > >> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient > >> -- > >> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are > >> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/3333034a/attachment-0001.htm From latifer at streamgrid.net Thu Apr 15 15:10:37 2010 From: latifer at streamgrid.net (Latif Khalifa) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:10:37 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> References: <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 9:38 PM, VR Hacks wrote: [snip] > B) Any developer who develops and/or distributes their viewer is > "responsible" (please note the operative word, responsible) for whatever > code they've implemented. In other words, it is up to them to a) debug their > own code, b) write their own EULA, and c) define & implement a user support > model. Should they choose to do none of the above, that is their choice, as > well. > > Otherwise put, responsible and smart coders will *always* include a EULA > with their binary distribution (regardless of whether or not it was designed > to connect to the grid). Why? Because it sets end user expectation. It > ensures you, as devs, will not end up in a infinite "support for free" loop, > and importantly, it provides legal protection should your code have a bug > that you did not catch. A smart coder would read the policy himself/herself, and base their decision based on their own understanding of it, not on an interpretation of some random person on a mailing list who has no stake in the matter whatsoever. Latif From m.a.daniel at iup.edu Thu Apr 15 15:12:49 2010 From: m.a.daniel at iup.edu (Michael Daniel) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:12:49 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> Message-ID: <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> VR Hacks wrote: >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a >> contract they made with you, can you? >> > > Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing > it. I stand corrected, then. I wasn't really talking about malicious code, though. I was just talking about protection from the worst-case scenario where a client has an unintended bug in it that causes rolling restarts, then LL comes after the 3rd party dev for damages. I meant to talk about incompetent coders, not malicious coders (I know that none of the coders on this mailing list fit either description, but it's still something to think about). Even LL sidesteps liability for damages done by the official viewer, so why shouldn't 3rd party devs try to do the same thing? On a different subject: Is Fractured Crystal correct in the following video when he says that he is not breaking TOS with the Onyx viewer because he only distributes the source code and not the binaries of it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRbV9SIbdCA&feature=player_embedded Thanks, ~Bubblesort Triskaidekaphobia From nexisentertainment at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 15:27:34 2010 From: nexisentertainment at gmail.com (Rob Nelson) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 15:27:34 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> References: <4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: <1271370454.2640.5.camel@RAGE> The TPV has no differentiation between source code and binary. The GPL requires sourcecode distribution anyway. He's in the wrong and I suspect he knows it. Also, to be quite frank, contracts that are designed to be displayed whenever the user logs into a service should be written so it is clear to the *user* what their responsibilities and restrictions are. If you want to have a "legalese" version, it should be attached as a "more detailed" link for the lawyers to look at. No one is going to hire a lawyer just to look at an e-document every damn time they sign into a bloody game. Fred Rookstown On Thu, 2010-04-15 at 18:12 -0400, Michael Daniel wrote: > VR Hacks wrote: > >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a > >> contract they made with you, can you? > >> > > > > Sure you can. After all, if you write malicious code, you know you're doing > > it. > I stand corrected, then. I wasn't really talking about malicious code, > though. I was just talking about protection from the worst-case > scenario where a client has an unintended bug in it that causes rolling > restarts, then LL comes after the 3rd party dev for damages. I meant to > talk about incompetent coders, not malicious coders (I know that none of > the coders on this mailing list fit either description, but it's still > something to think about). Even LL sidesteps liability for damages done > by the official viewer, so why shouldn't 3rd party devs try to do the > same thing? > > On a different subject: Is Fractured Crystal correct in the following > video when he says that he is not breaking TOS with the Onyx viewer > because he only distributes the source code and not the binaries of it? > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRbV9SIbdCA&feature=player_embedded > > > Thanks, > ~Bubblesort Triskaidekaphobia > > _______________________________________________ > 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 From antoniusmisfit at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 15:59:03 2010 From: antoniusmisfit at gmail.com (Tony Agudo) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 18:59:03 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> References: <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: Fractured is correct regarding Onyx not breaking GPL. That's how LL was able to legally keep Viewer 2 under wraps for so long. On Apr 15, 2010 6:13 PM, "Michael Daniel" wrote: VR Hacks wrote: >> I mean you can't legally be held liable for users who refuse to follow a >> cont... I stand corrected, then. I wasn't really talking about malicious code, though. I was just talking about protection from the worst-case scenario where a client has an unintended bug in it that causes rolling restarts, then LL comes after the 3rd party dev for damages. I meant to talk about incompetent coders, not malicious coders (I know that none of the coders on this mailing list fit either description, but it's still something to think about). Even LL sidesteps liability for damages done by the official viewer, so why shouldn't 3rd party devs try to do the same thing? On a different subject: Is Fractured Crystal correct in the following video when he says that he is not breaking TOS with the Onyx viewer because he only distributes the source code and not the binaries of it? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRbV9SIbdCA&feature=player_embedded Thanks, ~Bubblesort Triskaidekaphobia _______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available he... -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/8d7146d9/attachment.htm From joel.foner at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 16:04:16 2010 From: joel.foner at gmail.com (Joel Foner) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 19:04:16 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. Joel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/571ce804/attachment.htm From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Thu Apr 15 16:15:53 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:15:53 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: Unless I'm mistaken this discussion has been going since almost this list's entire lifetime... On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev > posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 > days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion > happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. > > Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. > > Joel > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/ac921f37/attachment.htm From dahliatrimble at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 16:32:15 2010 From: dahliatrimble at gmail.com (Dahlia Trimble) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 16:32:15 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: I also would be interested in seeing those freely offering their legal advice on this list also describing their qualifications to do so and in which jurisdictions they are licensed to practice law. If not, then please add a "IANAL" or other suitable disclaimer, or mention to what level you would be willing to be responsible for the misfortunes that may happen from others who may take your advice. On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev > posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 > days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion > happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. > > Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. > > Joel > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/4c3aa32f/attachment-0001.htm From brent.tubbs at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 17:13:18 2010 From: brent.tubbs at gmail.com (Brent Tubbs) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:13:18 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: Good idea! We could even have a directory of people qualified to talk about it who give their RL info so that people show up front which commenters are trustworthy. Any votes for writing this up as the Commenting on the Third Party Viewer Policy Policy, or COTTPVPP? /snark :) Brent On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Dahlia Trimble wrote: > I also would be interested in seeing those freely offering their legal > advice on this list also describing their qualifications to do so and in > which jurisdictions they are licensed to practice law. If not, then please > add a "IANAL" or other suitable disclaimer, or mention to what level you > would be willing to be responsible for the misfortunes that may happen from > others who may take your advice. > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Joel Foner wrote: > >> I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev >> posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 >> days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion >> happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. >> >> Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. >> >> Joel >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100415/dbe9204f/attachment.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Thu Apr 15 18:09:01 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 02:09:01 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: Don't go giving LL's lawyers ideas............ Seriously, I would not be surprised to find the "IANALP" come out next, complete with Joe talking about it inworld on voice only "So, we're here to see how to move forward with people who want to read any of our policies and dare interpret them - this should not be allowed, so from now on only registered lawyers can have an SL account" No offence Joe - you're a cool guy doing a hard job :) On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Brent Tubbs wrote: > Good idea! ?We could even have a directory of people qualified to talk about > it who give their RL info so that people show up front which commenters are > trustworthy. ?Any votes for writing this up as the Commenting on the Third > Party Viewer Policy Policy, or COTTPVPP? > /snark :) > Brent > > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Dahlia Trimble > wrote: >> >> I also would be interested in seeing those freely offering their legal >> advice on this list also describing their qualifications to do so and in >> which jurisdictions they are licensed to practice law. If not, then please >> add a "IANAL" or other suitable disclaimer, or mention to what level you >> would be willing to be responsible for the misfortunes that may happen from >> others who may take your advice. >> >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:04 PM, Joel Foner wrote: >>> >>> I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal (os-dev >>> posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's say the last 30 >>> days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual os-dev discussion >>> happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. >>> Back to my regularly scheduled programming, as it were. >>> Joel >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From boy.lane at yahoo.com Thu Apr 15 19:15:04 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:15:04 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Brown-bag meeting to continue dialog on TVPV Message-ID: <002901cadd0a$a1fd3d60$6401a8c0@hp> Looking at this mailing list the meeting with Joe did not do anything but put new oil in the fire. People start the same interpretation of intentions all over again that were already discussed to death. Intentions were never questioned. I don't really know what the point is of going through all of this once again. TPV very clearly and unambiguous states that I as a developer have to take any and all responsibility for everything, universal guilt for making a 3rd party viewer. And unless this is reworded there is no basis for any interpretation. So this whole discussion and valid arguments will fade into noise, bubbles and blurry opinions mostly from people who do not even have a stake in it. Nothing will change, LL reconfirmed their intentions instead of putting them down on paper in a readable and understandable form. But that was said hundreds of time... Anyway, not my problem anymore. They won and I leave. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100416/75e13c5e/attachment.htm From dzonatas at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 21:57:22 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 21:57:22 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity Message-ID: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> I want to share a use-case/concept for physic simulation where the client and sever wouldn't have to send object updates, or at least there wouldn't be as many updates needed to send from the sim to the client. Given we can use general relativity more as a mutual agreement rather than assume it is the only way reality changes; we could further expend such mutual agreement between a server and client as they simulate physics. Now don't expect FTL changes for this, yet we can use the same analogy and define a limit. Let's use one that LL has already defined as max velocity an object moves through a sim. Now, let's say we have two objects. Object (A) is within 10m to an avatar. Another object (B) is 50m away for that avatar. Now, since object (A) is within a distance an object can move within a second of max velocity, the client can be given rights to simulate object (A), and the simulator wouldn't send any updates to the client if the client does such. Since object (B) is outside the distance of an object can move within a second at max velocity, the simulator would continue to send updates to the client about object (b) only if in view (as it does now). If object (A) and object (B) are static, as in they never move, then the client would fully control its position within that relative second of space and all physics. If the avatar bounces off the static object, the client doesn't need to send updates to the sim unless the object needs to know if it was touched. If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above. Bottomline, this should be negotiable. The sim may not allow it at all if if the sim needs full physics control. The avatar may want to only be in sims that don't take full control of physics. If the client simulates some objects then the sim is expect to simulate the same objects. The two simulations should be basically in sync, yet accuracy of being in sync should be negotiable also. Relative second of space can be quickly calculated, for example, ( max diameter of avatar + 1 second distance of max velocity ) * 3.333... (basically like pi r squared) =) From Anders at Arnholm.se Thu Apr 15 22:55:59 2010 From: Anders at Arnholm.se (Anders Arnholm) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 07:55:59 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE><1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local><3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA><4BC733D9.9020903@Gmail.com> <02567BEF297745F18599C199B472F90D@DigitalDNA> <4BC76D06.7090505@Gmail.com> <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <4BC7FBEF.3000903@Arnholm.se> VR Hacks wrote: > Then the TPV policy does not apply to them. Though, again, and imo, it would > still be prudent for them to include a EULA with their binary distribution. > The EULA however in most of the world have no legal meaning, except it can give the user rights against the developer. For a license to be valid i have to be agreed by both parts before getting the product. Shrink wrap licenses and deals are frowed upon by most legal systems. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From Anders at Arnholm.se Thu Apr 15 23:02:39 2010 From: Anders at Arnholm.se (Anders Arnholm) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:02:39 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVPTopics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <35923479A1D44F5888E18D0EA4A06971@DigitalDNA> <4BC76FCE.1000808@Gmail.com> <4BC77126.1090707@Gmail.com> <5CF7D71281344380A05F29B761D02760@DigitalDNA> <4BC7793B.1010905@iup.edu> <4BC78F61.9060908@iup.edu> Message-ID: <4BC7FD7F.8090701@Arnholm.se> Joel Foner wrote: > I wonder if anyone has an easy way to calculate the actual signal > (os-dev posts) to noise (legal posts) ratio on this list over, let's > say the last 30 days. It's getting hard to recall when the last actual > os-dev discussion happened. Maybe I'm just missing it. The legal issues, what you are allowed to write is IMHO as impoartant as the how to write stuff. Escially if the you are allowed to write stuff is in question. The TPV police is imho defiltly signal on the deveopler list. -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. From tateru.nino at gmail.com Thu Apr 15 23:56:18 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:56:18 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> Hmm. However, with virtual objects the physical properties aren't fixed. Unlike regular matter, the physical properties of an SL object can change at any time. In fact - and I grant I only have anecdotal information to support this - I think it is less likely for an object's physical properties to remain constant than it is for them to change. On 16/04/2010 2:57 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > I want to share a use-case/concept for physic simulation where the > client and sever wouldn't have to send object updates, or at least there > wouldn't be as many updates needed to send from the sim to the client. > > Given we can use general relativity more as a mutual agreement rather > than assume it is the only way reality changes; we could further expend > such mutual agreement between a server and client as they simulate > physics. Now don't expect FTL changes for this, yet we can use the same > analogy and define a limit. Let's use one that LL has already defined as > max velocity an object moves through a sim. > > Now, let's say we have two objects. Object (A) is within 10m to an > avatar. Another object (B) is 50m away for that avatar. Now, since > object (A) is within a distance an object can move within a second of > max velocity, the client can be given rights to simulate object (A), and > the simulator wouldn't send any updates to the client if the client does > such. Since object (B) is outside the distance of an object can move > within a second at max velocity, the simulator would continue to send > updates to the client about object (b) only if in view (as it does now). > > If object (A) and object (B) are static, as in they never move, then the > client would fully control its position within that relative second of > space and all physics. If the avatar bounces off the static object, the > client doesn't need to send updates to the sim unless the object needs > to know if it was touched. > > If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there > are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not > digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above. > > Bottomline, this should be negotiable. The sim may not allow it at all > if if the sim needs full physics control. The avatar may want to only be > in sims that don't take full control of physics. If the client simulates > some objects then the sim is expect to simulate the same objects. The > two simulations should be basically in sync, yet accuracy of being in > sync should be negotiable also. > > Relative second of space can be quickly calculated, for example, ( max > diameter of avatar + 1 second distance of max velocity ) * 3.333... > (basically like pi r squared) > > =) > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From dzonatas at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 06:45:28 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 06:45:28 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> That's true for the case of non-static objects. We could, however, predict how fast an object changes and negotiate that limit, and that's basically what there is to agree upon for what is relative. For example, let's say an avatar moves around a sim of mostly static objects. It can do most of the work for client-side physics, so those updates are lowered traffic. When the avatar touches a non-static object, it could just send a signal to the sim that it touched the object. The sim then decides if it needs to send an update back to the client. If the object acts like a static object even if it is set non-static, then no update is needed from sim to client. Another example, lets say the avatar has lots of animated attachments. The avatar also moves around a sim of mostly static object, but the attachments are obvious non-static since they animate. Since the attachments are all within the avatar's relative space, the client-side physics can handle all the motion of the attachments. The sim may not need to know anything about the attachments unless they bump into something non-static. Soft body physics in mind... Tateru Nino wrote: > Hmm. However, with virtual objects the physical properties aren't fixed. > Unlike regular matter, the physical properties of an SL object can > change at any time. In fact - and I grant I only have anecdotal > information to support this - I think it is less likely for an object's > physical properties to remain constant than it is for them to change. > > On 16/04/2010 2:57 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> I want to share a use-case/concept for physic simulation where the >> client and sever wouldn't have to send object updates, or at least there >> wouldn't be as many updates needed to send from the sim to the client. >> >> Given we can use general relativity more as a mutual agreement rather >> than assume it is the only way reality changes; we could further expend >> such mutual agreement between a server and client as they simulate >> physics. Now don't expect FTL changes for this, yet we can use the same >> analogy and define a limit. Let's use one that LL has already defined as >> max velocity an object moves through a sim. >> >> Now, let's say we have two objects. Object (A) is within 10m to an >> avatar. Another object (B) is 50m away for that avatar. Now, since >> object (A) is within a distance an object can move within a second of >> max velocity, the client can be given rights to simulate object (A), and >> the simulator wouldn't send any updates to the client if the client does >> such. Since object (B) is outside the distance of an object can move >> within a second at max velocity, the simulator would continue to send >> updates to the client about object (b) only if in view (as it does now). >> >> If object (A) and object (B) are static, as in they never move, then the >> client would fully control its position within that relative second of >> space and all physics. If the avatar bounces off the static object, the >> client doesn't need to send updates to the sim unless the object needs >> to know if it was touched. >> >> If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there >> are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not >> digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above. >> >> Bottomline, this should be negotiable. The sim may not allow it at all >> if if the sim needs full physics control. The avatar may want to only be >> in sims that don't take full control of physics. If the client simulates >> some objects then the sim is expect to simulate the same objects. The >> two simulations should be basically in sync, yet accuracy of being in >> sync should be negotiable also. >> >> Relative second of space can be quickly calculated, for example, ( max >> diameter of avatar + 1 second distance of max velocity ) * 3.333... >> (basically like pi r squared) >> >> =) >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> >> > > From carlo at alinoe.com Fri Apr 16 08:07:48 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:07:48 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <20100416150748.GA9058@alinoe.com> Provided the changes can be made without being liable for damages On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: > on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following > predictions: > > - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has > been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP > (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect > to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber > service. > > - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed > > - a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the > various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe. > > imagine the possibilities. -- Carlo Wood From carlo at alinoe.com Fri Apr 16 08:11:22 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> Message-ID: <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to > either LLC or TP code) That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden of being legally liable for ANYTHING. If Linden Lab wants to put in their TPV the warning that they will remove the account of developers (users thus) that don't do they ask, go ahead. But under no circumstances any OS dev in their right mind will work on a project if they will be legally liable for it! This is just too insane for words. -- Carlo Wood From dzonatas at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 08:48:18 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 08:48:18 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <20100416145552.GA23152@mx1.daleglass.net> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> <20100416145552.GA23152@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: <4BC886C2.90800@gmail.com> I don't think you thought through all cases. Consider blind users, as they would only be concerned with objects within relative space, then even on a busy sim the sim would not have to send any updates to the client. Even if not blind, lets say someone has their view limit set only to relative space, as would be the potential possibility for those that mainly leave their client open for chat. Normally the viewer is set to greater than 64m away view distance, yet if someone has the chat window maximized then that distance isn't really needed. It would be an option to have the viewer automatically drop viewable distance to 30m or less, which would be optimal for chat distance. It's a use-case/concept that is low-hanging fruit for client-side physics. Dale Glass wrote: > It seems to me you're optimizing for rather narrow cases: sims of mostly > static objects, and presumably nobody else around. But why optimize for > something that is going to be very fast already? > > The most benefit would be gained from improving the performance of busy > sims, but it sounds like those ideas would rarely work in such a case. > > > From dale at daleglass.net Fri Apr 16 09:20:21 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:20:21 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: > - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has > been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP > (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect > to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber > service. Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL. IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a quite heavy loaded system. Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50 concurrent users. > > - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot better. If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love it. But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-) From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 09:34:37 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:34:37 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200 Carlo Wood wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: > > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* > > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** > > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done > > to either LLC or TP code) > > That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden > of being legally liable for ANYTHING. so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL you cannot take me in front of a judges? or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and nobody can tell something to me? your fantastic world is very nice.... GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about developer liability in front of him software... From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 09:40:34 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:40:34 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] SG2 build 3326 Message-ID: <20100416184034.283d6977.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. 0x09220aea in LLImageGL::setCategory(int) () uhm... same of build 3318, some hint to diagnose deeper this? SG don't start, asap first login screen appear it crash... From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 09:54:55 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:54:55 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] SG2 build 3326 In-Reply-To: <20100416184034.283d6977.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> References: <20100416184034.283d6977.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20100416185455.b80a205d.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:40:34 +0200 Tayra Dagostino wrote: > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > 0x09220aea in LLImageGL::setCategory(int) () > > uhm... same of build 3318, some hint to diagnose deeper this? > > SG don't start, asap first login screen appear it crash... great... turning OFF AuditTexture it work..... From tillie at xp2.de Fri Apr 16 10:24:34 2010 From: tillie at xp2.de (Tillie Ariantho) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 19:24:34 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 trunk binaries available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC89D52.6060704@xp2.de> On 14.04.2010 01:49, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > Whohoo! Yes! We now have the parabuild automated build system running > correctly on the 3 platforms and posting results to S3 successfully! The > only thing that's missing to make ua perfectly happy is having the > notification email working too... One last little snag to fix... The installer displays ${VIEWERNAME} instead of Snowglobe 2 yet. Tillie From tillie at xp2.de Fri Apr 16 10:39:02 2010 From: tillie at xp2.de (Tillie Ariantho) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 19:39:02 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Snowglobe 2.0 trunk binaries available In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BC8A0B6.6060502@xp2.de> On 14.04.2010 01:49, Philippe (Merov) Bossut wrote: > Hi, > > Whohoo! Btw. would it be possible to configure the installer that way that it doesnt require admin login on windows? I guess it's probably just the "install for all users" feature of the installer. Tillie From gareth at garethnelson.com Fri Apr 16 10:43:41 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:43:41 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> Message-ID: The warranty disclaimer protects from liability for mistakes, not maliciousness On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200 > Carlo Wood wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done >> > to either LLC or TP code) >> >> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden >> of being legally liable for ANYTHING. > > so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of > harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL > you cannot take me in front of a judges? > > or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to > nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and > nobody can tell something to me? > > your fantastic world is very nice.... > > GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is > about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about > developer liability in front of him software... > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From nickyperian at yahoo.com Fri Apr 16 12:01:24 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 12:01:24 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. Message-ID: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> After VC90 builds Release and RelWithDebInfo the No Media Plugin notification alarms and of course when trying video media the same notifications alarm. Could this be related to the gstreamer problem that occured on the linux builds? If so is there a known work around or patch. The build was with Boost 1-36 complied libraries. NickyP -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100416/fbbd07c2/attachment.htm From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 13:45:46 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:45:46 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8CC7A.1090702@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 currently attachments don't bump on anything, and animations do not affect what the avatar collides with, avatars got a static bounding box and that is it On 16/4/2010 10:45, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > That's true for the case of non-static objects. We could, however, > predict how fast an object changes and negotiate that limit, and that's > basically what there is to agree upon for what is relative. > > For example, let's say an avatar moves around a sim of mostly static > objects. It can do most of the work for client-side physics, so those > updates are lowered traffic. When the avatar touches a non-static > object, it could just send a signal to the sim that it touched the > object. The sim then decides if it needs to send an update back to the > client. If the object acts like a static object even if it is set > non-static, then no update is needed from sim to client. > > Another example, lets say the avatar has lots of animated attachments. > The avatar also moves around a sim of mostly static object, but the > attachments are obvious non-static since they animate. Since the > attachments are all within the avatar's relative space, the client-side > physics can handle all the motion of the attachments. The sim may not > need to know anything about the attachments unless they bump into > something non-static. > > Soft body physics in mind... > > > Tateru Nino wrote: >> Hmm. However, with virtual objects the physical properties aren't fixed. >> Unlike regular matter, the physical properties of an SL object can >> change at any time. In fact - and I grant I only have anecdotal >> information to support this - I think it is less likely for an object's >> physical properties to remain constant than it is for them to change. >> >> On 16/04/2010 2:57 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: >> >>> I want to share a use-case/concept for physic simulation where the >>> client and sever wouldn't have to send object updates, or at least there >>> wouldn't be as many updates needed to send from the sim to the client. >>> >>> Given we can use general relativity more as a mutual agreement rather >>> than assume it is the only way reality changes; we could further expend >>> such mutual agreement between a server and client as they simulate >>> physics. Now don't expect FTL changes for this, yet we can use the same >>> analogy and define a limit. Let's use one that LL has already defined as >>> max velocity an object moves through a sim. >>> >>> Now, let's say we have two objects. Object (A) is within 10m to an >>> avatar. Another object (B) is 50m away for that avatar. Now, since >>> object (A) is within a distance an object can move within a second of >>> max velocity, the client can be given rights to simulate object (A), and >>> the simulator wouldn't send any updates to the client if the client does >>> such. Since object (B) is outside the distance of an object can move >>> within a second at max velocity, the simulator would continue to send >>> updates to the client about object (b) only if in view (as it does now). >>> >>> If object (A) and object (B) are static, as in they never move, then the >>> client would fully control its position within that relative second of >>> space and all physics. If the avatar bounces off the static object, the >>> client doesn't need to send updates to the sim unless the object needs >>> to know if it was touched. >>> >>> If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there >>> are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not >>> digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above. >>> >>> Bottomline, this should be negotiable. The sim may not allow it at all >>> if if the sim needs full physics control. The avatar may want to only be >>> in sims that don't take full control of physics. If the client simulates >>> some objects then the sim is expect to simulate the same objects. The >>> two simulations should be basically in sync, yet accuracy of being in >>> sync should be negotiable also. >>> >>> Relative second of space can be quickly calculated, for example, ( max >>> diameter of avatar + 1 second distance of max velocity ) * 3.333... >>> (basically like pi r squared) >>> >>> =) >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzFQACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUmAQCfXphZ/Dp7U0x6rQGMT3IQrq/U hngAn1zDWr/DlqH/v94I/2UIPjbTBbzU =prc1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 13:50:02 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:50:02 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC886C2.90800@gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> <20100416145552.GA23152@mx1.daleglass.net> <4BC886C2.90800@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8CD7A.1000907@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 visually impaired people would still need to know if the door is open, if the trolley is on the station, if someone bumped into them etc On 16/4/2010 12:48, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > I don't think you thought through all cases. Consider blind users, as > they would only be concerned with objects within relative space, then > even on a busy sim the sim would not have to send any updates to the client. > > Even if not blind, lets say someone has their view limit set only to > relative space, as would be the potential possibility for those that > mainly leave their client open for chat. Normally the viewer is set to > greater than 64m away view distance, yet if someone has the chat window > maximized then that distance isn't really needed. It would be an option > to have the viewer automatically drop viewable distance to 30m or less, > which would be optimal for chat distance. > > It's a use-case/concept that is low-hanging fruit for client-side physics. > > Dale Glass wrote: >> It seems to me you're optimizing for rather narrow cases: sims of mostly >> static objects, and presumably nobody else around. But why optimize for >> something that is going to be very fast already? >> >> The most benefit would be gained from improving the performance of busy >> sims, but it sounds like those ideas would rarely work in such a case. >> >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzXgACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX2nQCdHlBNhgn/8HtaivsklbcaMeRK oWUAnAmJsLFRcl9l9dlzAD+hKJvHfNV0 =Avci -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 13:51:52 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:51:52 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: <4BC8CDE8.8060001@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 With so many machines at their disposal, why things don't work in a more distributed way? I can't understand why there is so much centralized stuff. On 16/4/2010 13:20, Dale Glass wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: >> - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has >> been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP >> (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect >> to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber >> service. > Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL. > > IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K > people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people > end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if > you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a > quite heavy loaded system. > > Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple > conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting > 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. > > Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50 > concurrent users. > >> >> - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed > Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot better. > > If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love it. > > > But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzecACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX8KgCfQ2Jt8ZmbKPxj+sdaH/2PXkd3 WxAAnAh/2iSUHc99BrA3UlcEvY9RA7Dw =yXOz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dzonatas at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 14:09:58 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:09:58 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC8CC7A.1090702@Gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> <4BC8CC7A.1090702@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8D226.1040406@gmail.com> This thread isn't about a mere box as you suggest. There thread is about how to take physics beyond that and allow the client to do part of the simulation, given a single use-case. Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > currently attachments don't bump on anything, and animations do not > affect what the avatar collides with, avatars got a static bounding box > and that is it > > On 16/4/2010 10:45, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> That's true for the case of non-static objects. We could, however, >> predict how fast an object changes and negotiate that limit, and that's >> basically what there is to agree upon for what is relative. >> >> For example, let's say an avatar moves around a sim of mostly static >> objects. It can do most of the work for client-side physics, so those >> updates are lowered traffic. When the avatar touches a non-static >> object, it could just send a signal to the sim that it touched the >> object. The sim then decides if it needs to send an update back to the >> client. If the object acts like a static object even if it is set >> non-static, then no update is needed from sim to client. >> >> Another example, lets say the avatar has lots of animated attachments. >> The avatar also moves around a sim of mostly static object, but the >> attachments are obvious non-static since they animate. Since the >> attachments are all within the avatar's relative space, the client-side >> physics can handle all the motion of the attachments. The sim may not >> need to know anything about the attachments unless they bump into >> something non-static. >> >> Soft body physics in mind... >> >> >> Tateru Nino wrote: >> >>> Hmm. However, with virtual objects the physical properties aren't fixed. >>> Unlike regular matter, the physical properties of an SL object can >>> change at any time. In fact - and I grant I only have anecdotal >>> information to support this - I think it is less likely for an object's >>> physical properties to remain constant than it is for them to change. >>> >>> On 16/04/2010 2:57 PM, Dzonatas Sol wrote: >>> >>> >>>> I want to share a use-case/concept for physic simulation where the >>>> client and sever wouldn't have to send object updates, or at least there >>>> wouldn't be as many updates needed to send from the sim to the client. >>>> >>>> Given we can use general relativity more as a mutual agreement rather >>>> than assume it is the only way reality changes; we could further expend >>>> such mutual agreement between a server and client as they simulate >>>> physics. Now don't expect FTL changes for this, yet we can use the same >>>> analogy and define a limit. Let's use one that LL has already defined as >>>> max velocity an object moves through a sim. >>>> >>>> Now, let's say we have two objects. Object (A) is within 10m to an >>>> avatar. Another object (B) is 50m away for that avatar. Now, since >>>> object (A) is within a distance an object can move within a second of >>>> max velocity, the client can be given rights to simulate object (A), and >>>> the simulator wouldn't send any updates to the client if the client does >>>> such. Since object (B) is outside the distance of an object can move >>>> within a second at max velocity, the simulator would continue to send >>>> updates to the client about object (b) only if in view (as it does now). >>>> >>>> If object (A) and object (B) are static, as in they never move, then the >>>> client would fully control its position within that relative second of >>>> space and all physics. If the avatar bounces off the static object, the >>>> client doesn't need to send updates to the sim unless the object needs >>>> to know if it was touched. >>>> >>>> If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there >>>> are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not >>>> digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above. >>>> >>>> Bottomline, this should be negotiable. The sim may not allow it at all >>>> if if the sim needs full physics control. The avatar may want to only be >>>> in sims that don't take full control of physics. If the client simulates >>>> some objects then the sim is expect to simulate the same objects. The >>>> two simulations should be basically in sync, yet accuracy of being in >>>> sync should be negotiable also. >>>> >>>> Relative second of space can be quickly calculated, for example, ( max >>>> diameter of avatar + 1 second distance of max velocity ) * 3.333... >>>> (basically like pi r squared) >>>> >>>> =) >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzFQACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUmAQCfXphZ/Dp7U0x6rQGMT3IQrq/U > hngAn1zDWr/DlqH/v94I/2UIPjbTBbzU > =prc1 > -----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 > > From dzonatas at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 14:11:32 2010 From: dzonatas at gmail.com (Dzonatas Sol) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:11:32 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] client-side physics and general relativity In-Reply-To: <4BC8CD7A.1000907@Gmail.com> References: <4BC7EE32.6020604@gmail.com> <4BC80A12.5090506@gmail.com> <4BC869F8.3040600@gmail.com> <20100416145552.GA23152@mx1.daleglass.net> <4BC886C2.90800@gmail.com> <4BC8CD7A.1000907@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8D284.60401@gmail.com> Do you understand the use-case I noted? As stated earlier: "If the objects aren't static or if there are more avatars, then there are several negotiation and scenarios that could happen, yet let's not digress immediately away from the basic use-case/concept stated above." Tigro Spottystripes wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > visually impaired people would still need to know if the door is open, > if the trolley is on the station, if someone bumped into them etc > > On 16/4/2010 12:48, Dzonatas Sol wrote: > >> I don't think you thought through all cases. Consider blind users, as >> they would only be concerned with objects within relative space, then >> even on a busy sim the sim would not have to send any updates to the client. >> >> Even if not blind, lets say someone has their view limit set only to >> relative space, as would be the potential possibility for those that >> mainly leave their client open for chat. Normally the viewer is set to >> greater than 64m away view distance, yet if someone has the chat window >> maximized then that distance isn't really needed. It would be an option >> to have the viewer automatically drop viewable distance to 30m or less, >> which would be optimal for chat distance. >> >> It's a use-case/concept that is low-hanging fruit for client-side physics. >> >> Dale Glass wrote: >> >>> It seems to me you're optimizing for rather narrow cases: sims of mostly >>> static objects, and presumably nobody else around. But why optimize for >>> something that is going to be very fast already? >>> >>> The most benefit would be gained from improving the performance of busy >>> sims, but it sounds like those ideas would rarely work in such a case. >>> >>> >>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >> >> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzXgACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX2nQCdHlBNhgn/8HtaivsklbcaMeRK > oWUAnAmJsLFRcl9l9dlzAD+hKJvHfNV0 > =Avci > -----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 > > From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 13:57:33 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:57:33 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8CF3D.6020704@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 a program that says things could still be protected under free speech, and could be considered art, and manufacturing pistols isn't illegal, even if some people kill people with them, but of course, if you build a pistol, and then use it to kill someone, then you probably would have to deal with the law enforcement people On 16/4/2010 13:34, Tayra Dagostino wrote: > On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200 > Carlo Wood wrote: > >> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote: >>> LL is only liable for Linden Core Code* >>> a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC** >>> a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done >>> to either LLC or TP code) >> >> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden >> of being legally liable for ANYTHING. > > so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of > harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL > you cannot take me in front of a judges? > > or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to > nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and > nobody can tell something to me? > > your fantastic world is very nice.... > > GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is > about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about > developer liability in front of him software... > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzzsACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWPdACff0XEvLLY/mjC6hvbWdg+iSJZ /FAAnj2IJs5ovYbqjh0lkkurcprNeLjo =MJIM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From gcanaday at gmail.com Fri Apr 16 15:04:43 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 18:04:43 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <4BC8CF3D.6020704@Gmail.com> References: <1271260963.19229.2.camel@RAGE> <1271262947.1889.0.camel@mdickson-laptop.local> <3530BCDDABE6434A875B87893819691D@DigitalDNA> <20100416151122.GB9058@alinoe.com> <20100416183437.d2995f79.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> <4BC8CF3D.6020704@Gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BC8DEFB.6090600@gmail.com> > deal with the law enforcement people > Chuckle @ wording ;) --GC From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Sat Apr 17 00:02:57 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 00:02:57 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: Hey, if you're looking for a review of message queueing agents, I ran across an SL review of MQs a while back when trying to choose one for our company's back end COMET server. It had value in my research and may have for someone trying to come up with chat alternatives... http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Dale Glass wrote: > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote: > > - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit > has > > been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to > XMPP > > (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to > connect > > to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber > > service. > Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL. > > IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be > 70K > people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K > people > end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if > you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably > a > quite heavy loaded system. > > Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with > multiple > conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but > supporting > 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. > > Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50 > concurrent users. > > > > > - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed > Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot > better. > > If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love > it. > > > But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-) > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100417/ceb373e6/attachment.htm From latifer at streamgrid.net Sat Apr 17 02:33:51 2010 From: latifer at streamgrid.net (Latif Khalifa) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 11:33:51 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] --loginuri command line option disabled in viewer2 final? Message-ID: Hello, I'm having problems specifying alternative login url with --loginuri command line option. It work up to "final" viewer2 release, through all the betas, but it seem to be not working in the final release, and in the later snowglobe builds. Latif From dahliatrimble at gmail.com Sat Apr 17 04:34:26 2010 From: dahliatrimble at gmail.com (Dahlia Trimble) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 04:34:26 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] --loginuri command line option disabled in viewer2 final? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Works for me on "Second Life 2.0.0 (203055) Mar 30 2010 08:11:18 (Second Life Developer)", but with a single dash. I also remember having trouble with localhost and I had to specify 127.0.0.1 instead On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 2:33 AM, Latif Khalifa wrote: > Hello, > > I'm having problems specifying alternative login url with --loginuri > command line option. It work up to "final" viewer2 release, through > all the betas, but it seem to be not working in the final release, and > in the later snowglobe builds. > > Latif > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100417/92c63e5e/attachment.htm From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 17 06:27:20 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:27:20 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: <20100417132720.GA9149@alinoe.com> Scaling of group messages is simple however. With one server per group you get a long way. Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average. Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so you can keep adding groups to a server until the total number of group members is around 20,000. Then you add a server. The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS system, for example .groups.secondlife.com And if you throw a good socket library against it (not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000 users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise. Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server and they can tell you how to do that. On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote: > IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K > people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people > end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if > you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a > quite heavy loaded system. > > Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple > conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting > 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. -- Carlo Wood From tateru.nino at gmail.com Sat Apr 17 06:33:16 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 23:33:16 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <20100417132720.GA9149@alinoe.com> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> <20100416162020.GB23152@mx1.daleglass.net> <20100417132720.GA9149@alinoe.com> Message-ID: <4BC9B89C.4040406@gmail.com> It isn't just the messages that need to scale. Messaging is probably the bottom of the list of use-cases for groups in practice. It's the bit where most of the actual *problems* show up, but it isn't actually as important a part of group scaling as the rest of the group functions. On 17/04/2010 11:27 PM, Carlo Wood wrote: > Scaling of group messages is simple however. > With one server per group you get a long way. > > Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average. > Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so > you can keep adding groups to a server until > the total number of group members is around 20,000. > Then you add a server. > > The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS > system, for example .groups.secondlife.com > > And if you throw a good socket library against it > (not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000 > users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise. > Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed > in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server > and they can tell you how to do that. > > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote: > >> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K >> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people >> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if >> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a >> quite heavy loaded system. >> >> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple >> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting >> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking. >> > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From makosoft at googlemail.com Sat Apr 17 07:02:10 2010 From: makosoft at googlemail.com (Aidan Thornton) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 15:02:10 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list In-Reply-To: <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> References: <1271269981.19229.12.camel@RAGE> <201004151609.20523.Lance.Corrimal@eregion.de> Message-ID: On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Lance Corrimal wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 20:49:59 schrieb Joe Linden: > >> **we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and >> we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a >> successful program*." > > > then... how about... opensourcing the SERVER (like someone pretty high up > suggested several years ago)? > > > and there's no reason to be afraid that giving away the other half of the > software would cause you longtime harm anyways... > > ...after all, the grid is more than server & client. the grid also is all > those boxes that it is running on... no way that a competitior could pull > 10000 PCs out of a hat on short notice. > > on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following > predictions: > > - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has > been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP > (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect > to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber > service. XMPP doesn't actually scale that well, unfortunately; a lot of the really big installs actually run their own protocol internally with better scaling. > - a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the > various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe. Unlikely. Transactions are hard. There's some low-hanging fruit with regards to LSL support though. In theory, one should be able to statically verify nearly all traditional non-Mono LSL scripts, and then optionally compile them down to native code. (The static verification would probably take a day or two to code; compilation down to native code would take longer and have more interesting tradeoffs. Direct threading might be a better approach.) From carlo at alinoe.com Sat Apr 17 07:18:25 2010 From: carlo at alinoe.com (Carlo Wood) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:18:25 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Group IMs and scalability. Message-ID: <20100417141825.GB9149@alinoe.com> On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:02:57AM -0700, Erik Anderson wrote: > Hey, if you're looking for a review of message queueing agents, I ran across an > SL review of MQs a while back when trying to choose one for our company's back > end COMET server. It had value in my research and may have for someone trying > to come up with chat alternatives... > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes Um... that page links to a page of mine and says: http://www.xs4all.nl/~carlo17/irc/run-irc.htm [Carlo Wood's notes on IRC]. Of note is the fact that IRC does not guarantee message order. I must say that I can't remember to ever have said that. In fact, IRC does garantee message order from the same source (which is all you can ask for), and obviously also between messages where one is a reaction to another. For example: Person A asks "What does LL stand for?" Person B answers "Linden Lab" Then those messages ARE garanteed to be seen in that order by everyone. The *current* group IM system being used in SL manages to reverse even how I see my own messages! I wonder how often different people see messages in a different order :/ The page also says that the largest IRC channels "top out" near 3400 members. The reason for that is that in the IRC protocol every part and join is sent to all members. I added an extention to the protocol (that can be set as channel MODE) to delay join/part messages until someone actually talks. Thus, instead of: 12:10 foo JOIN #channel 12:11 bar JOIN #channel 12:15 xyz JOIN #channel 12:17 foo PRIVMSG #channel :Hello You see: 12:17 foo JOIN #channel 12:17 foo PRIVMSG #channel :Hello I've seen channels with up to 20,000 users work fine like that (large "events"). Nevertheless, even that has a limit, of course: It remains needed to send a message that is spoken on the channel / group to every participant on the channel / group. However, an interesting fact is that groups do not have to grow indefinitely: *active* participants that read messages and write messages can, say read ten times as fast as they can type, that means that beyond 10 active participants the communication will start to slow down because the humans themselves are busy catching up. Non-active participants that haven't said anything for the longest time (you can simply order them like that) to NOT need real time information: you could just queue messages (that have a limit of say 1 per second per group, no matter how large the group is thus) for ... 10 minutes, and thus 600 messages, and then start to drop messages to those that have been silent the longest time. Thus, a new message comes in (that person is bumped to the top of the active participant list). The message is queued for output. The output thread starts sending the message to the top of the active participants list working it's way down; meaning: it puts the messages in the per-member output queues, and stops doing that if the total number of memory is exceeded (note that only one pointer per message is needed, so you can serve a LOT of users that way). If the thread is still busy while a new message comes in, it also stops and starts with the new message, provided that it sent the message at least to those that were active in the past 10 minutes (which will be at most around 10 people (and not grow indefinitely), see above), otherwise the new message is queued (for 1 microsecond) until it did that. That scales to an infinitely sized group, only limited and *automatically* limited by the human digestion speed (if too many messages occur, people will bail off and therefore automatically be skipped after 10 minutes). The only limit then remaining is the problem of having a file descriptor open per member, even those that idle: in order to know if they still idle you have to read their file descriptor... and as we all know, the kernel implementation of watching many sockets isn't optimal on every operating system. There is a limit there between 4000 and 20000 open file descriptors per machine. Hence, in order to make groups really scalable, you'll have to kick idling people out. For example: Someone logs into SL, is considered active and is added to all his 500 groups (or maybe the viewer will allow people to say which groups they want to join *automatically* in the future :p. Setting a limit to the number of automatically joined groups makes sense, setting a limit to the groups you can be a member of not). If does read not react to lots of those groups, so he is being kicked out of very active groups after 10 minutes, and out of non-active groups with thousands of members that are logged in, after -say- one hour. Note that typically those latter groups are of the type "access groups", groups that are used for access to a sim, not for chatting. It makes sense to treat those completely different. In the very least I'd say you shouldn't join those automatically at login. -- Carlo Wood From erikba at odysseus.anderson.name Sat Apr 17 13:32:17 2010 From: erikba at odysseus.anderson.name (Erik Anderson) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 13:32:17 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] message queue stability Message-ID: A random thought from a non-contributor after reviewing the wiki a bit... In the wiki page the biggest issue described for RabbitMQ was the idea that it could not easily be partitioned without each node having a complete description of every queue. I'm wondering if it would be feasible to separate the concept of "exchange" and "queue" onto different machines. This would be a two-level structure, where the lower level (the users or "queues") sends messages to the upper level (the groups or "exchanges") which forward the messages back down to the lower level and then to the users. If this model can be made to make any sense at all then it would permit partitioning of both users and groups without each node having to have complete knowledge. Of course one of the other major issues I see with RabbitMQ is that it doesn't save messages to disk except for disaster recovery. I hear they're trying to create a new persister that actually is willing to have some saved messages stored on disk, but otherwise I'm not sure I like the idea of messaging servers crashing whenever people hit their message cap... On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Erik Anderson < erikba at odysseus.anderson.name> wrote: > Hey, if you're looking for a review of message queueing agents, I ran > across an SL review of MQs a while back when trying to choose one for our > company's back end COMET server. It had value in my research and may have > for someone trying to come up with chat alternatives... > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100417/83252dd9/attachment.htm From andsim2 at gmail.com Sat Apr 17 15:32:50 2010 From: andsim2 at gmail.com (Andrew Simpson) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 18:32:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? Message-ID: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> hey does anyone know where is fmod API 3.75 i cant find from http://www.fmod.org/index.php/download now it all over version 4 when sl wiki say download fmod API 3.75 what going to do? From ardylay at gmail.com Sat Apr 17 15:39:48 2010 From: ardylay at gmail.com (Ardy Lay) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 17:39:48 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? In-Reply-To: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> References: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BCA38B4.7000409@gmail.com> Andrew Simpson wrote: > hey does anyone know where is fmod API 3.75 i cant find from > http://www.fmod.org/index.php/download > now it all over version 4 > when sl wiki say download fmod API 3.75 what going to do? > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > Hi Andrew! Have a look in http://www.fmod.org/files/fmod3/ The 3.xx series seems to be deprecated. From nickyperian at yahoo.com Sat Apr 17 16:07:13 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2010 16:07:13 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? In-Reply-To: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> References: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> Message-ID: <80703.52862.qm@web43501.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> http://gosoftware.org/fmod_software/ Give this URL a try ________________________________ From: Andrew Simpson To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Sat, April 17, 2010 5:32:50 PM Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? hey does anyone know where is fmod API 3.75 i cant find from http://www.fmod.org/index.php/download now it all over version 4 when sl wiki say download fmod API 3.75 what going to do? _______________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100417/a54c1efc/attachment.htm From dale at daleglass.net Sun Apr 18 05:51:35 2010 From: dale at daleglass.net (Dale Glass) Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 14:51:35 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? Message-ID: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> Hi! I've run into an issue here: I'd like to reliably edit a parcel's banlist. However, it seems that ParcelAccessListReply has no way of indicating that the entire banlist has been delivered: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/ParcelAccessListReply The best way I came up with for now is that if the packet is not entirely full (has less than 49 entries), then it's the last one. That doesn't help with ban lists with 49 people in them, though. And at that point the available solutions seem horribly hackish. Is there something I'm missing, or it's really a grid limitation? Thanks! From aimee at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 19 05:55:15 2010 From: aimee at lindenlab.com (Aimee Walton) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 13:55:15 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] [PATCH] Review request for SNOW-575, SNOW-571 and SNOW-573 Message-ID: <4514A6DB-5996-47D7-83C1-912CBAD3EB0C@lindenlab.com> Hi, I could use some patch reviews from a Snowglobe committer for these three issues. SNOW-575 Menu item to hide object selection outlines for 2.0 This reimplements VWR-6918 (SNOW-78) the "2.0 way" (it's now much cleaner and easier to add little things like this than it was when I did the original). The other two are a couple of Mac specific deprecation fixes, when building against the OS X 10.6 SDK: SNOW-571 Replacing another deprecated WaitNextEvent() for the OS X 10.6 SDK SNOW-573 Deprecated methods for getting and setting the system audio mute prevent building with the OS X 10.6 SDK Aimee. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/57ab6cdb/attachment.htm From josh at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 19 11:46:53 2010 From: josh at lindenlab.com (Joshua Bell) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 11:46:53 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: It is certainly the case that several request/response-type messages do not have a way of signaling that all of the data was sent. This arose from thinking of the protocol in a purely viewer-centric way, i.e. if the viewer was populating a list view, the data in additional packets is simply appended. This imposes unfortunate constrains the design of clients that want to process things differently than the viewer. This varies from message to message and even within message usage, e.g. MapBlockReply has a "end of results" signal when issued in response to to MapNameRequest, but not when issued in response to MapBlockRequest. I took a peek at the sim code that issues ParcelAccessListReply and your analysis appears to be correct; there's a special case for sending a null entry if there are no entries at all, otherwise the data is just sent in as many packets as necessary, with no termination indicator. On Sun, Apr 18, 2010 at 5:51 AM, Dale Glass wrote: > Hi! > > I've run into an issue here: I'd like to reliably edit a parcel's > banlist. > > However, it seems that ParcelAccessListReply has no way of indicating > that the entire banlist has been delivered: > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/ParcelAccessListReply > > The best way I came up with for now is that if the packet is not > entirely full (has less than 49 entries), then it's the last one. That > doesn't help with ban lists with 49 people in them, though. And at that > point the available solutions seem horribly hackish. > > Is there something I'm missing, or it's really a grid limitation? > > Thanks! > _______________________________________________ > 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 > From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 19 15:57:57 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 15:57:57 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? In-Reply-To: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> References: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> Message-ID: Hi, On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Andrew Simpson wrote: > hey does anyone know where is fmod API 3.75 i cant find from > http://www.fmod.org/index.php/download > now it all over version 4 > when sl wiki say download fmod API 3.75 what going to do? > Logged and fixed: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-600 For URL details, see changesets: - Snowglobe 2.0 svn rev 3311 : http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/changeset/3311 - Snowglobe 1.4 svn rev 3312 : http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/changeset/3312 Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/123edadd/attachment.htm From merov at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 19 16:48:04 2010 From: merov at lindenlab.com (Philippe (Merov) Bossut) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 16:48:04 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. In-Reply-To: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: Hi Nicky, On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Nicky Perian wrote: > After VC90 builds Release and RelWithDebInfo the No Media Plugin > notification alarms and of course when trying video media the same > notifications alarm. Could this be related to the gstreamer problem that > occured on the linux builds? If so is there a known work around or patch. > It's difficult to guess what's wrong in your particular instance but your viewer reacts as if it was not able to find the plugins at all. You should have an "llplugin" folder in the same folder you get your executable and this folder should contain media_plugin_webkit.dll (used to render "text/html" mime types on Windows), a bunch of qt libs (qtweblit4.dll and others), a codecs folder and an imageformats folder, both containing qt libraries. Do you have those things around? Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/5ed095ce/attachment.htm From secret.argent at gmail.com Mon Apr 19 17:07:23 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:07:23 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> Message-ID: <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> On 2010-04-19, at 13:46, Joshua Bell wrote: > It is certainly the case that several request/response-type messages > do not have a way of signaling that all of the data was sent. This > arose from thinking of the protocol in a purely viewer-centric way, > i.e. if the viewer was populating a list view, the data in additional > packets is simply appended. This imposes unfortunate constrains the > design of clients that want to process things differently than the > viewer. > > This varies from message to message and even within message usage, > e.g. MapBlockReply has a "end of results" signal when issued in > response to to MapNameRequest, but not when issued in response to > MapBlockRequest. > > I took a peek at the sim code that issues ParcelAccessListReply and > your analysis appears to be correct; there's a special case for > sending a null entry if there are no entries at all, otherwise the > data is just sent in as many packets as necessary, with no termination > indicator. Would that explain why the viewer sometimes appears to lose data (for example, spurious missing inventory), because it's got no way of knowing if some of the packets from the server were lost unless there were later packets? If so, that doesn't seem like a really good design for the viewer itself. From tigrospottystripes at gmail.com Mon Apr 19 17:14:02 2010 From: tigrospottystripes at gmail.com (Tigro Spottystripes) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 21:14:02 -0300 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4BCCF1CA.3000406@Gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 i believe this is related: http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/VWR-15563 "Client gives up before finishing to load full inventory due to packet loss" On 19/4/2010 21:07, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > On 2010-04-19, at 13:46, Joshua Bell wrote: > >> It is certainly the case that several request/response-type messages >> do not have a way of signaling that all of the data was sent. This >> arose from thinking of the protocol in a purely viewer-centric way, >> i.e. if the viewer was populating a list view, the data in additional >> packets is simply appended. This imposes unfortunate constrains the >> design of clients that want to process things differently than the >> viewer. >> >> This varies from message to message and even within message usage, >> e.g. MapBlockReply has a "end of results" signal when issued in >> response to to MapNameRequest, but not when issued in response to >> MapBlockRequest. >> >> I took a peek at the sim code that issues ParcelAccessListReply and >> your analysis appears to be correct; there's a special case for >> sending a null entry if there are no entries at all, otherwise the >> data is just sent in as many packets as necessary, with no termination >> indicator. > > Would that explain why the viewer sometimes appears to lose data (for > example, spurious missing inventory), because it's got no way of > knowing if some of the packets from the server were lost unless there > were later packets? If so, that doesn't seem like a really good design > for the viewer itself. > _______________________________________________ > 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 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvM8awACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWIFACeMVHV1D6uMPGyB969JVkKmvK9 SzYAni3CU9FKQQE69zHSQv5XAdTRfO4p =1312 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From josh at lindenlab.com Mon Apr 19 17:42:32 2010 From: josh at lindenlab.com (Joshua Bell) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 17:42:32 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 5:07 PM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > > Would that explain why the viewer sometimes appears to lose data (for > example, spurious missing inventory), because it's got no way of > knowing if some of the packets from the server were lost unless there > were later packets? If so, that doesn't seem like a really good design > for the viewer itself. That's a completely different issue. The lower level transport protocol guarantees reliable delivery of certain types of messages - packets are ack'd and resent if missed. It's possible that there are bugs in reliable message delivery (it is a non-standard protocol), bugs in how they are handled if received out of order, and/or that the messages you are referring to are not flagged for "reliable" delivery; I'm not sure. You can use the analogy of certified mail as the low level transport. If you snail-mail me to ask a question (say, ask me for the draft of my latest novel), and I snail-mail my my answer back in multiple letters via certified mail (say, one chapter at a time), we can both be certain they arrived (assuming we trust the postal service...), but you have no idea how many to expect, so you can never be sure you got them all... unless the last page says "The End". (We're talking about old and - bluntly - crufty parts of the protocol here. In general, new additions to the Second Life protocol are done using HTTP(S) as a transport and RESTful semantics where they make sense, which uses the operating system provided implementation of TCP for reliable transport, optional TLS encryption, transport metadata like content length, and overall structure of the message content in LLSD.) From wolfpup67 at earthlink.net Mon Apr 19 19:58:50 2010 From: wolfpup67 at earthlink.net (Brendan Wilson) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 22:58:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? In-Reply-To: References: <4BCA3712.5030703@gmail.com> Message-ID: <001801cae035$75dfcc10$619f6430$@net> For all you folks looking for current links to the needed Fmod and QT file dl pages they are here: https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Microsoft_Windows_Builds This is a new wiki page in development focusing on building Viewer 2 on Windows based systems. Also if the rest of you have suggestions please feel free to add to the page. I have even added some things to the page myself. From: opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com [mailto:opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Philippe (Merov) Bossut Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 6:58 PM To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Fmod 3.74? Hi, On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 3:32 PM, Andrew Simpson wrote: hey does anyone know where is fmod API 3.75 i cant find from http://www.fmod.org/index.php/download now it all over version 4 when sl wiki say download fmod API 3.75 what going to do? Logged and fixed: https://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SNOW-600 For URL details, see changesets: * Snowglobe 2.0 svn rev 3311 : http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/changeset/3311 * Snowglobe 1.4 svn rev 3312 : http://svn.secondlife.com/trac/linden/changeset/3312 Cheers, - Merov No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.801 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2821 - Release Date: 04/19/10 14:31:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/a33ea346/attachment-0001.htm From wolfpup67 at earthlink.net Mon Apr 19 20:06:54 2010 From: wolfpup67 at earthlink.net (Brendan Wilson) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:06:54 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. In-Reply-To: References: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <001d01cae036$883e23b0$98ba6b10$@net> This was also happening to me till I got the Fmod and QT files needed for the build now that I have them I do not get this error any more. From: opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com [mailto:opensource-dev-bounces at lists.secondlife.com] On Behalf Of Philippe (Merov) Bossut Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 7:48 PM To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. Hi Nicky, On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Nicky Perian wrote: After VC90 builds Release and RelWithDebInfo the No Media Plugin notification alarms and of course when trying video media the same notifications alarm. Could this be related to the gstreamer problem that occured on the linux builds? If so is there a known work around or patch. It's difficult to guess what's wrong in your particular instance but your viewer reacts as if it was not able to find the plugins at all. You should have an "llplugin" folder in the same folder you get your executable and this folder should contain media_plugin_webkit.dll (used to render "text/html" mime types on Windows), a bunch of qt libs (qtweblit4.dll and others), a codecs folder and an imageformats folder, both containing qt libraries. Do you have those things around? Cheers, - Merov No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.801 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2821 - Release Date: 04/19/10 14:31:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/95ee3da1/attachment.htm From nickyperian at yahoo.com Mon Apr 19 20:33:49 2010 From: nickyperian at yahoo.com (Nicky Perian) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 20:33:49 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. In-Reply-To: References: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <877122.62881.qm@web43504.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Merov, The llplugin folder is not present. All the libraries are present because the VC80 build is good and it has the llplugin folder. FMOD and qt are all present. The codecs and imageformats folders are present. An image copy of the Release folder is here: http://picpaste.com/NoMediaPlugin.PNG Thanks, Nicky ________________________________ From: Philippe (Merov) Bossut To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Mon, April 19, 2010 6:48:04 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. Hi Nicky, On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Nicky Perian wrote: > >After VC90 builds Release and RelWithDebInfo the No Media Plugin notification alarms and of course when trying video media the same notifications alarm. Could this be related to the gstreamer problem that occured on the linux builds? If so is there a known work around or patch. > It's difficult to guess what's wrong in your particular instance but your viewer reacts as if it was not able to find the plugins at all. You should have an "llplugin" folder in the same folder you get your executable and this folder should contain media_plugin_webkit.dll (used to render "text/html" mime types on Windows), a bunch of qt libs (qtweblit4.dll and others), a codecs folder and an imageformats folder, both containing qt libraries. Do you have those things around? Cheers, - Merov -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/42080d8a/attachment.htm From wolfpup67 at earthlink.net Mon Apr 19 20:56:50 2010 From: wolfpup67 at earthlink.net (Brendan Wilson) Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2010 23:56:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. In-Reply-To: <877122.62881.qm@web43504.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> References: <856964.74245.qm@web43509.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> <877122.62881.qm@web43504.mail.sp1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <003101cae03d$8197b330$84c71990$@net> Nicky, You will have the missing folder if you follow the instructions in the Download and compile libraries that must be manually added to each LL source release section of this wiki page https://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Viewer_2_Microsoft_Windows_Builds Once you follow the steps for Fmod and QT then re-run develop.yp and build it again in VS once that is done you should have the missing folder. From: Nicky Perian [mailto:nickyperian at yahoo.com] Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 11:34 PM To: Philippe (Merov) Bossut; opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Cc: Brendan Wilson Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. Merov, The llplugin folder is not present. All the libraries are present because the VC80 build is good and it has the llplugin folder. FMOD and qt are all present. The codecs and imageformats folders are present. An image copy of the Release folder is here: http://picpaste.com/NoMediaPlugin.PNG Thanks, Nicky _____ From: Philippe (Merov) Bossut To: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Mon, April 19, 2010 6:48:04 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] No Media Plugin was found to handle the "text/html" mime type. Media of this type will be unavailable. Hi Nicky, On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Nicky Perian wrote: After VC90 builds Release and RelWithDebInfo the No Media Plugin notification alarms and of course when trying video media the same notifications alarm. Could this be related to the gstreamer problem that occured on the linux builds? If so is there a known work around or patch. It's difficult to guess what's wrong in your particular instance but your viewer reacts as if it was not able to find the plugins at all. You should have an "llplugin" folder in the same folder you get your executable and this folder should contain media_plugin_webkit.dll (used to render "text/html" mime types on Windows), a bunch of qt libs (qtweblit4.dll and others), a codecs folder and an imageformats folder, both containing qt libraries. Do you have those things around? Cheers, - Merov No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 9.0.801 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2821 - Release Date: 04/19/10 14:31:00 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100419/8b205207/attachment.htm From lenglish5 at cox.net Tue Apr 20 02:29:39 2010 From: lenglish5 at cox.net (Lawson English) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 02:29:39 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] [vwrap] "What's *not* in VWRAP" - presentation in SL April 20 @ 9:30am Pacific In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BCD7403.2040208@cox.net> From VWRAP list: David W Levine wrote: > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/ThorneBridgeTown/162/134/22 > > That's the ThorneBridgeTown IBM Research sim, if you want a teleport > offer, tap Zha Ewry in world sometime around or after 9:20 PDT > > > > From: Joshua Bell > To: vwrap at ietf.org > Date: 04/19/2010 06:14 PM > Subject: [vwrap] "What's *not* in VWRAP" - presentation in SL April > 20 @ 9:30am Pacific > Sent by: vwrap-bounces at ietf.org > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > Unless there's been a last minute schedule switcheroo I'm unaware of, > I'll be presenting "What's *not* in VWRAP - a dissection of the Linden > Lab Legacy Protocol" to the AWGroupies in Second Life on Tuesday, > April 20th (thats tomorrow!) at 9:30am Pacific. > > I'm actually unsure of where the session will be held in-world. Can a > regular please reply with a SLURL? > > This was material I'd intended to present at IETF77 in Anaheim but > great content from other presenters took priority. The slides are > linked from https://datatracker.ietf.org/meeting/77/materials.html but > stick to the source at > https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0AfAytYlNCPECZGZ2M24yMl8yN2N0OGJueGNy&hl=en > > (I'm not planning on any last minute edits, though!) > > For those who look through the slides but may miss the context of the > presentation: > > * The talk tries to give listeners a framework to answer the oft-asked > question "When will XYZ be standardized in VWRAP?" > * The talk is intended to be provocative; the slides make some bold > claims I'm expecting the audience to take issue with! > * There is no call for consensus on topics; contrariwise, there are > calls for opening up discussions > * It is not presented with any sort of implied authority, either as > co-chair to the WG or as an employee of Linden Lab. The working group > is highly encouraged to disagree with any of my reasoning or > conclusions! > > The in-world presentation will not be under the auspices of the IETF > (i.e. "Note Well" does not apply); any extensive discussion will be > directed to this list, though. > _______________________________________________ > vwrap mailing list > vwrap at ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > vwrap mailing list > vwrap at ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vwrap > From boy.lane at yahoo.com Tue Apr 20 06:45:58 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 21:45:58 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) References: Message-ID: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just want to make you aware of that. Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done nevertheless. Boy From tateru.nino at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 06:59:56 2010 From: tateru.nino at gmail.com (Tateru Nino) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 23:59:56 +1000 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BCDB35C.9020701@gmail.com> Interesting changes, worthy of some thoughtful consideration. Have to run this one back past the lawyers and see what they say. On 20/04/2010 11:45 PM, Boy Lane wrote: > As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, > LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. > > I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document > people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just > want to make you aware of that. > > Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: > http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE > > Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" > are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. > "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." > > Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done > nevertheless. > > Boy > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges > > -- Tateru Nino http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/ From joe at lindenlab.com Tue Apr 20 07:02:26 2010 From: joe at lindenlab.com (Joe Linden) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 07:02:26 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: Boy, There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me. This update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm hosting today. The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so there would be no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, both of which are effective on 4/30. I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here: http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 -- joe On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Boy Lane wrote: > As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, > LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. > > I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document > people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just > want to make you aware of that. > > Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: > http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE > > Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" > are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. > "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." > > Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done > nevertheless. > > Boy > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/d60cb94c/attachment.htm From gigstaggart at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 07:10:02 2010 From: gigstaggart at gmail.com (Gigs) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:10:02 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BCDB5BA.6080706@gmail.com> These look like positive changes that address some of the concerns. Thank you for your efforts Joe. Joe Linden wrote: > Boy, > > There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me. > This update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm > hosting today. The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so > there would be no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, > both of which are effective on 4/30. > > I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here: > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > -- joe > From latifer at streamgrid.net Tue Apr 20 07:12:32 2010 From: latifer at streamgrid.net (Latif Khalifa) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:12:32 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: <4BCDB5BA.6080706@gmail.com> References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> <4BCDB5BA.6080706@gmail.com> Message-ID: I second that Gigs, very positive changes indeed. My thanks to Joe for making this happen. Latif On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Gigs wrote: > 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 > From secret.argent at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 07:15:49 2010 From: secret.argent at gmail.com (Argent Stonecutter) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:15:49 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> Message-ID: On 2010-04-19, at 19:42, Joshua Bell wrote: > That's a completely different issue. The lower level transport > protocol guarantees reliable delivery of certain types of messages - > packets are ack'd and resent if missed. 1. Are these messages actually being handled by that mechanism? 2. I have seen similar failure modes in downloads over TCP where the end-user software declined to cross reference the expected size of the file and the size of the file actually transferred and reported a complete transfer when it wasn't actually completed. Not only does the lower level transport have to guarantee delivery, the higher level has to notice whether that happened or not. Telling it how many objects to expect (size of the file) or transferring a terminating token (eg, the way zip puts the directory at the end of the archive... which is how I discovered this problem) is a common safeguard. From discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 07:16:31 2010 From: discrete.dreamscape at gmail.com (Discrete Dreamscape) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 10:16:31 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> <4BCDB5BA.6080706@gmail.com> Message-ID: Agreed, this is a major improvement. Thanks, Joe. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:12 AM, Latif Khalifa wrote: > I second that Gigs, very positive changes indeed. > > My thanks to Joe for making this happen. > > Latif > > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Gigs wrote: > > These look like positive changes that address some of the concerns. > > > > Thank you for your efforts Joe. > > > > Joe Linden wrote: > >> Boy, > >> > >> There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me. > >> This update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm > >> hosting today. The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so > >> there would be no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, > >> both of which are effective on 4/30. > >> > >> I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here: > >> > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > >> > >> -- joe > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/5f1e2150/attachment.htm From boy.lane at yahoo.com Tue Apr 20 07:19:58 2010 From: boy.lane at yahoo.com (Boy Lane) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 22:19:58 +0800 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <000e01cae094$90519dd0$7a00a8c0@hp> Thanks Joe, I was not aware that there is an ongoing discussion. Which would be 3am in the middle of the night for me anyway. But thumbs up for the initiative. Boy ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Linden To: Boy Lane Cc: opensource-dev at lists.secondlife.com Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 10:02 PM Subject: Re: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) 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 On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Boy Lane wrote: As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just want to make you aware of that. Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done nevertheless. Boy _______________________________________________ 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/d06f5562/attachment-0001.htm From gareth at garethnelson.com Tue Apr 20 08:16:36 2010 From: gareth at garethnelson.com (Gareth Nelson) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 16:16:36 +0100 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: There have been numerous times since the new TOS came out that i've wanted to go inworld and have refused to do so for fear of liability under this policy. Thank you for fixing it, now I might be able to play with the new plugins API without fear. With those changes, this is a policy that personally I am much more comfortable accepting. On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 3:02 PM, 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 > > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 6:45 AM, Boy Lane wrote: >> >> As this did not make it into the mailing list yet but is rather important, >> LL changed the TPV policy again, quiet, in the background. >> >> I don't know how this affects the legal validity of that document >> people agreed by clickwrapping since the new ToS popup, I just >> want to make you aware of that. >> >> Robin ran a diff and the actual changes can be found here: >> http://pastebin.com/Yd1j1EdE >> >> Major changes as I see them, the terms "...you develop and distribute" >> are gone, and one new paragraph was introduced. >> "Nothing in this Policy is intended to modify the terms of the GPL." >> >> Someone in LL seems to have woken up, but damage is done >> nevertheless. >> >> Boy >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > -- ?Lanie, I?m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for everyone. That?s worth going to jail for. That?s worth anything.? - Printcrime by Cory Doctrow Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html From robertltux at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 08:41:06 2010 From: robertltux at gmail.com (Robert Martin) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 11:41:06 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, 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 > im going to try and make this meeting myself but could somebody please make sure that all of the information is either done or relayed in text (and could somebody please get all of the voice stuff sorted before the meeting so we don't spend half the meeting tripping over the audio) -- Robert L Martin From josh at lindenlab.com Tue Apr 20 09:04:12 2010 From: josh at lindenlab.com (Joshua Bell) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 09:04:12 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] ParcelAccessListReply packets have no reliable end of list indication? In-Reply-To: References: <20100418125135.GA26246@mx1.daleglass.net> <13ED6032-F329-47C0-8173-1205C34DD878@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > On 2010-04-19, at 19:42, Joshua Bell wrote: >> >> That's a completely different issue. The lower level transport >> protocol guarantees reliable delivery of certain types of messages - >> packets are ack'd and resent if missed. > > 1. Are these messages actually being handled by that mechanism? As far as I can tell from inspection of the code, yes. I don't know how to correlate that with the actual behavior of the system any more than you do, however. :( > 2. I have seen similar failure modes in downloads over TCP where the > end-user software declined to cross reference the expected size of the file > and the size of the file actually transferred and reported a complete > transfer when it wasn't actually completed. Not only does the lower level > transport have to guarantee delivery, the higher level has to notice whether > that happened or not. Telling it how many objects to expect (size of the > file) or transferring a terminating token (eg, the way zip puts the > directory at the end of the archive... which is how I discovered this > problem) is a common safeguard. Completely agreed. TCP guarantees the integrity of the stream, but by itself provides no metadata about what's being transported on top of it or that all of the data was sent. Common transfer mechanisms like FTP and HTTP provide that, but even those don't guarantee that the recipient processed the data it received. (Which, FWIW, motivated the design of http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Chttp) As I mentioned previously, any new additions to the SL protocol use a network stack with multiple layers of reliability, security and metadata to provide transport of data that's more easily reasoned about. From tayra.dagostino at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 10:55:57 2010 From: tayra.dagostino at gmail.com (Tayra Dagostino) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:55:57 +0200 Subject: [opensource-dev] test on SG2 Message-ID: <20100420195557.045bf129.tayra.dagostino@gmail.com> i looked for somethings in debug settings (from advanced menu) without success.... is there a way to: 1) enable/disable hovertext on whole screen 2) enable/disable SLPlugin (totally, if audio and multimedia turned off one SLPlugin session lunched anyway) any hint? From latha at solarmirror.com Tue Apr 20 11:11:13 2010 From: latha at solarmirror.com (Latha Serevi) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 11:11:13 -0700 Subject: [opensource-dev] IRC Bridge for today's brown-bag, 4/20 noon PDT Message-ID: <4BCDEE41.20906@solarmirror.com> I'll relay text chat again to irc://irc.quickfox.net/groupies . Not sure if Robin will be relaying to EFNet channel #brownbag . We'll transcribe voice to text as feasible. Latha From wolfpup67 at earthlink.net Tue Apr 20 11:40:20 2010 From: wolfpup67 at earthlink.net (Brendan Wilson) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:40:20 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] trying to get a mod working Message-ID: <000301cae0b8$ee24bdb0$ca6e3910$@net> I'm working on moding the the lllogchat.ccp to add a datestamp to the file name but im having dificuilitie with getting it to work roght of fail to compile. The following erros are from my latest compile: 94>lllogchat.cpp 94>lllocationinputctrl.cpp 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(196) : error C2065: 'ostringstream' : undeclared identifier 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(196) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';' before identifier 'date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(196) : error C2275: 'boost::gregorian::date' : illegal use of this type as an expression 94> C:\linden\projects\2010\snowglobe\trunk\libraries\include\boost/date_time/gr egorian/greg_date.hpp(37) : see declaration of 'boost::gregorian::date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(197) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before '<<' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(197) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before '<<' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(198) : warning C4832: token '.' is illegal after UDT 'LLLogChat::makeLogFileName::date' 94> ..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(197) : see declaration of 'LLLogChat::makeLogFileName::date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(198) : error C2027: use of undefined type 'LLLogChat::makeLogFileName::date' 94> ..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(197) : see declaration of 'LLLogChat::makeLogFileName::date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(198) : error C2228: left of '.str' must have class/struct/union 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(203) : error C2146: syntax error : missing ';' before identifier 'date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(203) : error C2275: 'boost::gregorian::date' : illegal use of this type as an expression 94> C:\linden\projects\2010\snowglobe\trunk\libraries\include\boost/date_time/gr egorian/greg_date.hpp(37) : see declaration of 'boost::gregorian::date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(204) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before '<<' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(204) : error C2143: syntax error : missing ';' before '<<' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(205) : warning C4832: token '.' is illegal after UDT 'boost::gregorian::date' 94> C:\linden\projects\2010\snowglobe\trunk\libraries\include\boost/date_time/gr egorian/greg_date.hpp(37) : see declaration of 'boost::gregorian::date' 94>..\..\newview\lllogchat.cpp(205) : error C2039: 'str' : is not a member of 'boost::gregorian::date' 94> C:\linden\projects\2010\snowglobe\trunk\libraries\include\boost/date_time/gr egorian/greg_date.hpp(37) : see declaration of 'boost::gregorian::date' Here is the related code: std::string LLLogChat::makeLogFileName(std::string filename) { time_t now = time(NULL); struct tm * t = localtime(&now); if (filename == "chat") { ostringstream date; date << "-" << t->tm_year << "-" << t->tm_mon << "-" << t->tm_mday; std::string formated_date = date.str(); filename += formated_date; } else { ostringstream date; date << "-" << t->tm_year << "-" << t->tm_mon; std::string formated_date = date.str(); filename += formated_date; } filename = cleanFileName(filename); filename = gDirUtilp->getExpandedFilename(LL_PATH_PER_ACCOUNT_CHAT_LOGS,filename); filename += ".txt"; return filename; } I'm trying to do something similar to this section of code: std::string LLLogChat::timestamp(bool withdate) { time_t utc_time; utc_time = time_corrected(); std::string timeStr; LLSD substitution; substitution["datetime"] = (S32) utc_time; if (withdate) { timeStr = "["+LLTrans::getString ("TimeYear")+"]/[" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeMonth")+"]/[" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeDay")+"] [" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeHour")+"]:[" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeMin")+"]"; } else { timeStr = "[" + LLTrans::getString("TimeHour") + "]:[" + LLTrans::getString ("TimeMin")+"]"; } LLStringUtil::format (timeStr, substitution); return timeStr; } When I tried this modification to the code: std::string LLLogChat::makeLogFileName(std::string filename) { time_t utc_time; utc_time = time_corrected(); std::string timeStr; LLSD substitution; substitution["datetime"] = (S32) utc_time; if (filename == "chat" ) { timeStr = "-"+LLTrans::getString ("TimeYear")+"-" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeMonth")+"-" +LLTrans::getString ("TimeDay"); } else { timeStr = "[" + LLTrans::getString("TimeHour") + "]:[" + LLTrans::getString ("TimeMin")+"]"; } LLStringUtil::format (timeStr, substitution); filename += timeStr; filename = cleanFileName(filename); filename = gDirUtilp->getExpandedFilename(LL_PATH_PER_ACCOUNT_CHAT_LOGS,filename); filename += ".txt"; return filename; } It would compile just fine but I wouls get chat-year,datetime,slt-mthnum,datetime,slt-day,datetime,slt as the file name instead of chat-2010-04-19 for the file name which is what I want -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/5818ca72/attachment-0001.htm From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Tue Apr 20 12:38:50 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:38:50 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: 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 Date: Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:00 PM Subject: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict To: ronfesta at docs.rutgers.edu > [ronfesta at 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/ca63a9c4/attachment.htm From djfoxyslpr at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 12:41:17 2010 From: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com (Jonathan Irvin) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 14:41:17 -0500 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: "4. You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party Viewers that you use. Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable for any Third-Party Viewers." That sure sounds like what you all have been wanting. The risk is on the user, not so much the developer. Jonathan Irvin Cell: +1-318-426-5253 Email: djfoxyslpr at gmail.com On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:41, Robert Martin wrote: > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:02 AM, Joe Linden wrote: > > Boy, > > > > There was nothing quiet, or "in the background" about it, believe me. > This > > update is the topic of conversation at the noon PDT brown bag I'm hosting > > today. The changes were pushed live ahead of the meeting, so there would > be > > no question they are incorporated in to the TPV and TOS, both of which > are > > effective on 4/30. > > > > I'll see those of you still interested in the subject at noon here: > > > http://maps.secondlife.com/secondlife/Linden%20Estate%20Services/229/230/29 > > > > -- joe > > > im going to try and make this meeting myself but could somebody please > make sure that all of the information is either done or relayed in > text > (and could somebody please get all of the voice stuff sorted before > the meeting so we don't spend half the meeting tripping over the > audio) > -- > Robert L Martin > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/304aea31/attachment.htm From gcanaday at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 12:50:44 2010 From: gcanaday at gmail.com (Glen Canaday) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:50:44 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Quiet amendments of TPV (again) In-Reply-To: References: <000801cae08f$d040e720$7a00a8c0@hp> Message-ID: <4BCE0594.9060306@gmail.com> On 04/20/2010 03:41 PM, Jonathan Irvin wrote: > "4. You assume all risks, expenses, and defects of any Third-Party > Viewers that you use. Linden Lab shall not be responsible or liable > for any Third-Party Viewers." > > That sure sounds like what you all have been wanting. The risk is on > the user, not so much the developer. > That sounds to me like exactly the change people wanted in the first place. This also means I can dive into the viewer source. I spose I should be gettin' on it now... --GC -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/opensource-dev/attachments/20100420/b7462469/attachment.htm From gigstaggart at gmail.com Tue Apr 20 12:51:04 2010 From: gigstaggart at gmail.com (Gigs) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:51:04 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4BCE05A8.6000101@gmail.com> 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* > > Date: Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 1:00 PM > Subject: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict > To: ronfesta at docs.rutgers.edu > > > > [ronfesta at 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 From overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu Tue Apr 20 12:55:36 2010 From: overdrive at dceo.rutgers.edu (Ron Festa) Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:55:36 -0400 Subject: [opensource-dev] Fwd: [gnu.org #566095] Possible Licensing Conflict In-Rep