[sldev] Re: Plugin architecture

Callum Lerwick seg at haxxed.com
Fri Feb 23 19:37:07 PST 2007

On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 01:27 +0100, Dale Glass wrote:
> So, without plugins what we get is:
> * SL official build
> * Dale's build
> * Opensecondlife build
> * Opensecondlife with X patch
> * Bob's tweaked client
> ...
> and so on. Want my scanner? Run my client. Want voip? Run Bob's. Both at once? 
> Well, if you can't code and somebody doesn't bother to make a client with 
> both, you're out of luck. Not hard to imagine how that situation is less than 
> desirable.

The proper thing to do is bless, say, OpenSL as the de-facto non-linden
fork, and keep everything merged into the OpenSL tree as much as

I have no idea what the intentions of the OpenSL people are though, and
if they're up to being the Linus Torvalds of Second Life. They might be,
and they might not be. All I know is their web site currently doesn't
tell me a damn thing about how OpenSL differs from mainline.

God damn, this whole plugin thing is hilarious. Everyone's sitting
around shooting their mouths off about hypotheticals, and no one is
writing any code.

This absolutely takes the cake:


Step EIGHT is implementation? Step NINE is example plugins? Hahahahah
OMFG who comes up with this stuff?

Step ONE is write code (like Dale). Then you can worry about isolating
it into a plugin once you know what API you need, then you can generate
bindings for Mono and Javascript and Lua and Python and Java and Fortran
and whatever the hell other crack you feel like smoking.

Don't make me start smacking people with copies of "The Art of Unix

-------------- 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/20070223/b8b7e759/attachment-0001.pgp

More information about the SLDev mailing list