[sldev] Question: Replacing current group chat with XMPP?

[Ryan McDougall]

I am sorry that is not quite true. The GPL and BSD (clause<4) licenses
are *not* "incompatible". Not by a long stretch. If you couple GPLed
code with BSD code a vortex to the gates of hell doesn't open up,
spewing forth legions of lawyers-of-the-damned. What happens when you
mix the two is quite understandable and compatible -- the combined
work becomes GPL, as is intended by the GPL.

While it is true that OpenSim would not accept GPL code into its
trunk, OpenSim has a "forge" website for precisely these kinds of
projects here: http://forge.opensimulator.org/gf/

I encourage you to show your work to the OpenSim guys, and apply for a
spot on opensim forge if appropriate.

If you wished for your work to go into OpenSim proper, you would
likely be asked to use a BSD license.

Cheers,

On Sat, Sep 13, 2008 at 2:55 AM, Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com> wrote:
> That wouldn't be acceptable for inclusion into Opensim then as it's
> incompatible with the BSD license that Opensim uses.
>
> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:49 AM, Harold Brown <labrat.hb at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> GPL version 2
>> http://www.psyced.org/dist/LICENSE.txt
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:40 AM, Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> PSYC looks interesting but I can't seem to find any licensing terms on
>>> any of their web sites. Also looks like they haven't had much opportunity to
>>> do any really large scale testing of their protocol. Anyway if they are
>>> interested in working with Opensim then this thread should probably be
>>> continued on the opensim-dev mailing list. Details of the list can be found
>>> at https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 10:00 AM, Harold Brown <labrat.hb at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> lynX a developer of PSYC has just recently downloaded the OpenSIM svn
>>>> and had expressed interest (yesterday) of integrating PSYC with it (totally
>>>> unrelated to the conversation here) I mentioned the discussion here and they
>>>> posted the following on their wiki:
>>>>
>>>> http://about.psyc.eu/Second_Life
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Argent Stonecutter
>>>> <secret.argent at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2008-09-11, at 11:06, Robin Cornelius wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is there then a call to have a different type of group. One that does
>>>>>> not have chat associated with it.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would be point 2 in http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-2818 .
>>>>>
>>>>> An alternative would be to allow you to have an association with a
>>>>> group that doesn't include chat or any of the other high-impact features.
>>>>> There are a number of groups that I would like to "suspend membership" in
>>>>> without having to re-apply to rejoin.
>>>>>
>>>>> See http://jira.secondlife.com/browse/SVC-1173 .
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2008-09-11, at 11:45, David M Chess wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I take it that this is a problem we'd rather not reproduce, rather
>>>>>> than something that we want to make sure that an intragrid Group IM system
>>>>>> also does.  :)
>>>>>
>>>>> It's just an indication that fairly high latency for starting a group
>>>>> conversation isn't automatically a fatal flaw. Certainly 10-20 seconds
>>>>> latency is entirely acceptable.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Given the number and volume of the voices I hear raised asking for the
>>>>>> limit to be increased, I think it's pretty common for people to be in 25
>>>>>> groups, for whatever reason.  Not necessarily 25 groups that really need a
>>>>>> group chat channel, though.
>>>>>
>>>>> That would be the point there.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd also like to note that person-person IM and group IM are generally
>>>>> different kinds of conversation, have different goals, anddon't need to
>>>>> share transport. For example, I could EASILY see logging in to IRC to get
>>>>> into a group chat without wanting to get into point-to-point chat with
>>>>> individuals, and vice versa.
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, it would be nice to be able to log in to office hours with a
>>>>> client that doesn't require a wide open firewall.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using open protocols for IM and group IM would allow me to run (for
>>>>> example) a shell IRC client or XMPP client on my colo server that I'm ssh-ed
>>>>> into. I can't see that happening with any likely Vivox-based client.
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>>>>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
>>>>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>>>>> privileges
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>>>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
>>>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>>>> privileges
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
>>> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
>>> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
>>> privileges
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Policies and (un)subscribe information available here:
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/SLDev
> Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting
> privileges
>