[sldev] Re: Viewer forks (was: SLDev Digest, Vol 21, Issue 25)

[Edward Artaud]

Yeah, the comparison to SLim is an unfortunate one that doesn't
support your argument.  Actually, both are symptoms of intentional or
unintentional lack of transparency of roadmap.  Prok's fears seam to
stem from a belief that roadmap is unduly influenced by things Office
Hours participation, which I don't have the experience to comment on
one way or another although my inclination would be that the community
creating alternate viewers to experiment with UI is a great idea.  The
SLim thing simply comes from the back that it's unclear to which
degree busdev concerns are deltaing what has been previously
communicated as direction.

On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 5:24 AM, Argent Stonecutter
<secret.argent at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2008-09-09, at 22:28, Aimee Walton wrote:
>>
>> Following that logic we should all be extremely concerned and protesting
>> the release of the SLim client, as it suggests that Linden Lab intend to
>> remove the graphical world view from the standard viewer in favor of a text
>> only client in future.
>
> Some of us ARE raising questions about the SLim client on technical grounds,
> because it changes a lot of assumptions about IM and about LL's decision to
> bypass XMPP, and about what it implies about the relationship of IM and SL
> and Voice for the future.