I would wish everything to be as honest and open as you've described it, Merov.
The problem is that the open source / TPV community has been battered around the head too much recently (by factors outside of your control, I'm sure), and when the answer to everything seems to be "No" except when it involves a corporate partner, it doesn't lead to comfortable thoughts. The situation has been *SO* bad recently that even small hints like your "*it might need preliminary work being done on the client-scripting side of things*" are a significant win --- that's how depressed the situation is currently. Yet notice that you don't even state that the community will have any say in it --- your remarks are entirely consistent with Firefly continuing as a secret internal project and all community requirements being ignored. "Must try harder." Hopefully this will be remedied, and the spirit of cooperation rekindled. Client-side scripting is a bit of a weather vane for how well relations are progressing, and it's quite easy to turn thing around. It just needs some good will to be shown, and open dialog to return. There was going to be a new openness after Viewer 2.0 was released, wasn't there? We heard that said multiple times around the end of 2009. It still remains to appear though. Morgaine. ===================================== On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut <me...@lindenlab.com > wrote: > Hi Morgaine, > > I'm surprised and disappointed you're reading so much into this. Personal > (and irrelevant) feelings aside, my answer was motivated strictly by the > following: > - There is an already existing set of code with experimental results and it > looks very nice indeed. > - There's a chance all this good work might get lost forever if it doesn't > find a host. > - According to Tuomas, it's relatively isolated on the fringe of the code > and doesn't need rearchitecture. > - The Snowglobe community is certainly the best qualified to look at this > code and see how we could merge it if at all. > > Based on that, the minimum we can do as a community is to show respect for > the work done by Tuomas and his group and welcome them. I see no reason to > turn them down and you haven't provided any BTW. > > Note that I'm not offering to merge the project "as is" but lay out some > steps for Tuomas to take so that we can collectively study that code, > namely: log something in JIRA and attach a patch so we can look at the code. > > I hope others on the list feel the same and that we'll find some enthusiast > folks to look into Tuomas project and see if and how it can fit into > Snowglobe (hint: I'm unlikely to have the bandwidth to do this). The fact > that it might need preliminary work being done on the client-scripting side > of things is, IMO, a plus (give us something tangible to gauge our > thinking). > > Regards, > - Merov > > > _______________________________________________ > Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: > http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev > Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting > privileges >
_______________________________________________ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep unmoderated posting privileges
