[opensource-dev] The Plan for Snowglobe
dillydobbs at gmail.com
Fri Sep 10 16:27:32 PDT 2010
I would like to know 2 things, as an observer. You continue to make
statements like 'TPV developers' as if you speak for them all.
Secondly, I distinctly remember you saying goodbye to us all, Is this your
Hi im back statement?
This isn't meant to be offensive im just trying to understand where your
I love deadlines. I like the whooshing sound they make as they fly by
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Henri Beauchamp <sldev at free.fr> wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 12:22:25 -0400, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> > On 2010-09-09 7:15, Aidan Thornton wrote:
> > > On 9/8/10, Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence)<oz at lindenlab.com> wrote:
> > >> * Take down the Snowglobe subversion repository
> > > That's going to be kinda obnoxious, because it means non-Linden Labs
> > > developers won't be able to look back at what was changed in
> > > Snowglobe, when and why. There will still be mainstream 1.23-based
> > > viewers by then unless Linden Labs does something incredibly brilliant
> > > or something incredibly stupid, and they'll still have a use for the
> > > Snowglobe version control history.
> > Viewer developers should be thinking now about how to migrate to the new
> > code base so that you can support your features and interfaces with the
> > new underlying capabilities (and there are more coming)
> Viewer developers will not consider migrating to the viewer 2 code base
> for many months, because it's simply easier for them to port the few
> interesting new features of viewer 2 to viewer 1, than to redo the whole
> UI of viewer 2 to match their user base expectations and needs.
> I already ported the Tattoo and Alpha wearables months ago to the Cool
> VL Viewer (and most TPVs now reuse my patch), and the inventory item
> links support a few weeks ago. I'll work next on multiple attachments
> per point.
> With Snowglobe v1.5 as the code base and the above cited backports,
> you already have a better viewer than viewer 2, with a better stability
> and higher frame rates...
> > and superior stability that the new code base has.
> ROFLOL !!!!
> You are kidding, aren't you ?... If not, then please try using a good
> TPV and see how many times it crashes in a week... 0 for the Cool VL
> Viewer (and I'm using it every day). Fact is that TPVs got fixes that
> v1.23.5 doesn't have and that makes them MUCH stabler than 1.23.5, and
> v2 (which is even worst, stability-wise, than v1.23.5 !). The reason
> is simple: should I crash, I trace the crash down and fix the code.
> Crash gone !
> > Eventually (and there is _no_ plan for when this will be - certainly
> > longer than 3 months), it will no longer be possible for us to continue
> > to support viewers based on the 1.x code base (including our own), and
> > we'll stop.
> By then, all the required changes will be ported to the v1 codebase
> and migrating to v2 will still be unnecessary... This could go like
> that for at least one or even two years before the backports become
> too cumbersome to be worth staying with v1. I know it first hand,
> since I did just that with the Cool VL Viewer v1.19.
> > Well before this happens, we'll have a public discussion
> > about it, and about what must be supported to remain compatible. If you
> > have moved to and stayed reasonably current with the 2.x code base, then
> > it will be a non-event for you.
> Again, TPV developers are not going to bother with v2 unless YOU, Linden
> Lab, change your stance on the UI and do accept reversals to the v1 way,
> where needed.
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the opensource-dev