[sldev] Re: Vote for voice protocol documentation

Callum Lerwick seg at haxxed.com
Wed Aug 15 19:52:44 PDT 2007


On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 16:20 -0700, John Hurliman wrote:
> The problem is that "they" is the partnership of Vivox and DiamondWare. 
> It has nothing to do with Linden Labs (other then they happen to be one 
> of the customers), and discussing what Vivox/DiamondWare should do on a 
> Linden Lab mailing list is not going to accomplish anything. You would 
> have to call up Vivox and speak to a representative there.

What makes you think Vivox would give a crap about what I think? Linden
Lab is the one paying them. I talk to Linden Lab, via this mailing list,
and Linden Lab deals with its contractors.

If this is falling on deaf ears, then Linden Lab is choosing to ignore
the concerns of their users.

> LL is not in charge of what codec is used or what patented algorithms 
> are used, unless they dump the solution entirely (not going to happen) 
> or strongarm Vivox in to rewriting their software

I do believe that's what LL is paying them to do, write software. If
switching codecs is an insurmountable problem, then Vivox is a band of
inept feebs who can't design a sane piece of software. Are they?

I was simply trying to make it clear that just open sourcing the whole
thing will not be good enough for downstream packagers of the client.
Patented codecs that aren't freely licensed = no go in Fedora.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20070815/7bc95199/attachment.pgp


More information about the SLDev mailing list