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

Glen Canaday gcanaday at gmail.com
Fri Apr 2 09:51:55 PDT 2010

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: 

... 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 


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
> <secret.argent at gmail.com>  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<carlo at alinoe.com>  wrote:
>>>> What is the reason that those fixes aren't incorporated in "pure"
>>>> opensim?

More information about the opensource-dev mailing list