Peter, I'm going to change the subject line (and start a new thread) because it seems that we're "hijacking" Pablo's thread here (with issues not pertaining directly to Blender2Rex), but they're certainly good points that do need to be addressed.
I do agree that the "OAR" format should probably be updated (to an "OAR 3.0") in OpenSim core and that ReX mesh formats are included in the core. That way users that are running OpenSim vanilla, or OpenSim + ModRex (or even full Taiga) could simply just use the updated OAR format for backing up and restoring regions. I believe Adam would know more about this, as I believe he did the original "OAR 2.0" changes, and he'd probably have a good idea of how to create a format that could be used for BOTH OpenSim and OpenSim + ModRex backups. Hopefully the OAR format could possibly just be extended (in OpenSim core) to include the ReX "mesh" formats. I don't really know enough about this subject to comment, but Adam (and Toni) would probably know more about it, but it's certainly a topic that should be brought up for discussion. I believe extending the OAR format to an "OAR 3.0" format with ModRex interoperability would be good so that we can still use the OAR format for full region backups. I'm just not familiar enough with the differences between the asset server stores to even comment on this. Hopefully this could be addressed in the OpenSim core, and an "updated" OAR 3.0 backup (format) could possibly add mesh support and do backups for both native OpenSim and OpenSim + ModRex regions. http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OAR_Format_0.2 Maybe some form of "region format" settings could be added to OpenSim core to extend/support an "OAR 3.0" file format, which would store new "region-type" information (about whether it's native OpenSim vanilla region backup format or an OpenSim + ModRex backup format). So that the OAR backup format could be an inter-operable format. As far as the differences between the backup formats, and creating interoperability in OpenSim core, I believe either Adam or Toni could probably answer this question in much better detail. *> Is it possible to have a grid accessible for public access * *> via CB for everyone, but just give the region owners the right * *> to create things in their corresponding region at the same time ? * *> I could see a case where a school would like to keep some * *> persistent public accesible basic installations and at the same * *> time assign to each teacher their own classroom (region), where * *> the teacher could be able to customize it and asign his/her* *> students **to access the place? As well as giving the students * *> some rights **to create their own things? * User region/grid permissions, group permissions and land rights is another good topic for discussion. It might be nice to create a nice Admin GUI (possibly an "Admin Control Panel?" from within Naali?) for setting/controlling regions/objects/land User and Group permissions. I'm not sure on the status of this, or whether group permissions is even in that latest Taiga 0.0.2. I would need to familiarize myself with the latest Taiga (based on SciSim) before I made a comment, but I would hope that Group region/objects/land permissions have been implemented in the latest Taiga. (I'm not familiar enough with the latest 0.0.2 Taiga to confirm whether or not group region/objects/land permissions are functioning properly yet). It may not hurt to possibly have a nice standard QT-based admin control panel GUI (for the server console) that can be installed on the server as well (for user/land/group rights administration). It might not be a bad idea to have an "In-World Console Application" from within the Naali viewer (since some things like terrain manipulations, statistics and some SIM administration related tasks are not available using the Viewer and are only available on the command line application console where OpenSim is running). It might be nice to have a pop-up console window (in Naali, under the Admin Control Panel group) to have remote access to this same console available in-world. Possibly use some type of Instant Messaging window with the simulator itself (as they did with those old command line terminals). [So admins don't have to open ports on the firewall for remote desktop or VNC, and setup Remote Desktop or VNC, etc.] Would be nice to just have a remote-admin console window available in Naali (even if it's just based on some simple Instant Messaging window with the simulator itself). Information on Group permissions for objects and land can be found here: http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OpenSim:Permissions(Server) I'm not sure about authentication or "interoperability" issues or even how permissions currently work in the latest Taiga 0.0.2 or between a vanilla OpenSim and an OpenSim + ModRex + CableBeach (SciSim-based 0.0.2 Taiga) server. *> Another idea just crossed my mind, concerning the** * > *> backup and restore of the regions and i dont know if** * > *> that would be a technical sound approach. If the regions** * > *> could be stored each into its own database instead of** * > *> having all regions on a server in the opensim db, then it** * > *> might be easy to make a complete independent and** * > *> scheduled backup/restore of the regions with all the** * > *> meshes via the db, instead of creating some oar's and** * > *> some workaround to keep the meshes.** > * > This is an interesting thought. From a sys admin perspective, I could see how this could be advantageous. Especially as database sizes grow (and begin to become a problem with nightly backups). If asset databases were stored individually (per region) then the database sizes would be much smaller, and could be backed up much easier (since admins could just schedule nightly backups on just the asset db stores. >From a sys admin perspective, this would be great for scheduling nightly backups. One problem that I see is that the individual region databases should probably somehow be linked, so that assets could be shared among the different regions (at a grid level). So that assets don't need to be duplicated (or stored twice) between different regions. Although personally, I do like the idea of individual asset store databases (on a per region basis) instead of just one very large grid asset store (which can become very difficult to manage). *> could be stored each into its own database instead of** * > *> having all regions on a server in the opensim db, then it** * > I don't know how "technically sound" that approach would even be, nor do I have any idea as to the performance impacts such an idea would even have on the regions or the OpenSim core server (and these changes would probably need to be done in OpenSim core), but from a Sys Admin perspective it certainly seems like an interesting idea. ;-) I supposed if you ever wanted to move a particular region to a different server, then you could simply just copy/move that individual region database over to a new server, and that would be the end of it. I supposed it would make doing nightly region backups easier (if the database sizes are huge, and you now had much smaller region size databases). It might make sense, especially as region sizes begin to grow into "Mega Region" sizes. (Again, this is something that would probably need to be discussed and addressed in OpenSim core). It could possibly make things a bit easier (and open the doors) for more advanced failover and server clustering. I don't think the topic of OpenSim region failover or server clustering has even been addressed yet, but it's another topic that should probably be discussed in OpenSim core (and realXtend/Taiga). Some form of consensus should be made, to incorporate such load balancing/failover/clustering features into OpenSim Server core. Individual region databases certainly wouldn't have any impact or replace the "OAR" backup format functionality or the ability to use OAR for trying to "share" regions with others (in an OAR format), but it certainly would make doing backups and the Sys Admin (Grid/Network Administration) functions a little bit easier. It could make individual region failover and clustering a bit easier. (Without having to cluster one gigantic database, you could cluster smaller region databases between individual servers). Especially with the concept of backing up the much smaller-sized individual region databases (especially as region asset database sizes may grow as we get into Mega Regions). *> But im affraid that this procedure might break away too far of * *> the opensim build,even if i personaly think, that this would * *> benefit the opensimulator scene as well. * Most of these changes would probably need to be addressed in OpenSim core. On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:15 PM, Mark Malewski <mark.malew...@gmail.com>wrote: > *> ** instead of creating some oar's and some workaround to * > *> keep the meshes. * > > Is there any way to update the original "OAR" format in OpenSim core to > possibly an "OAR 3.0" format that would include support for ReX meshes? > > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OpenSim_Archives > > I believe Adam did the work on OAR format 0.2, maybe it could be updated to > a 0.3 format that would include native support for backing up ReX meshes? > http://opensimulator.org/wiki/OAR_format_0.2 > > > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Peter Steinlechner < > psteinlech...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Thanks Toni for bringing the light back into the scene and me back on >> track :-) >> >> The question that now came up is the following and any hints are highly >> appreciated: >> >> Is it possible to have a grid accessible for public access via CB for >> everyone, but just give the region owners the right to create things in >> their corresponding region at the same time ? I could see a case where a >> school would like to keep some persistent public accesible basic >> installations and at the same time assign to each teacher their own >> classroom (region), where the teacher could be able to customize it and >> asign his/her students to access the place? As well as giving the students >> some rights to create their own things? >> >> Another idea just crossed my mind, concerning the backup and restore of >> the regions and i dont know if that would be a technical sound approach. If >> the regions could be stored each into its own database instead of having all >> regions on a server in the opensim db, then it might be easy to make a >> complete independent and scheduled backup/restore of the regions with all >> the meshes via the db, instead of creating some oar's and some workaround to >> keep the meshes. >> >> But im affraid that this procedure might break away too far of the opensim >> build,even if i personaly think, that this would benefit the opensimulator >> scene as well. >> >> Anyhow - keep up the great work - realxtend realy rocks :-) >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 9:04 AM, Toni Alatalo <ant...@kyperjokki.fi>wrote: >> >>> On ti, 2010-07-06 at 08:33 +0200, Peter Steinlechner wrote: >>> > Now I am completly confused. What is the difference between Taiga >>> > Server and opensim + modrex ? Either its to early in the morning or I >>> > just must have a massive misunderstanding. >>> >>> Based on a quick reading of what Tara was writing below, the distinction >>> here seems to refer to authentication. Taiga is opensim + modrex + cable >>> beach, and CB brings web techs for auth & inventory, openid + webdav, >>> which are not connected to any SL like grid but work anywhere on the >>> web. I.e. with vanilla Opensim you have to make a new account, with >>> Taiga you don't. >>> >>> BTW CB is nowadays merged with the VWRAP effort which is otherwise >>> worked on mostly by Linden folks, and Opensim itself has also adopted >>> webdav inventory too, so can well be that vwrap & opensim / simiangrid & >>> taiga are essentially the same things soon. Or I don't know but we'll >>> see. >>> >>> Of course anyone can still configure their servers to be closed, e.g. >>> accept only accounts created for that game / service , or allow anon >>> access like websites usually, or whatever. I think many of the debates >>> that seem like big political decisions around these things are >>> technically simple configuration setups that don't affect the >>> programming work much. >>> >>> ~Toni >>> >>> > On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Tara Desoto <tarades...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > Hello >>> > >>> > I was simply giving my opinion to the designer of this >>> > project . I fully realise that my point of view is going to >>> > be different than yours , simply because of the differences >>> > between my project and yours ( if you even have a Rex >>> > project ) .. I attempted to present a collaborative >>> > viewpoint to the situation . Since the designers' project is >>> > about the Integration of Blender and Realxtend , the scope of >>> > this discussion is wider than simple asset pipelining ... In >>> > brief , I approached this topic from the aspect of community >>> > building and collaborative integration , rather than solitary >>> > asset pipelining. I am not saying that my points of view are >>> > any more possible or probable than the next , given the scope >>> > of the mission . I simply presented this to the designer in a >>> > cordial manner . IF he thinks that all my ideas are dumb or >>> > if he thinks that some of them are good , then so be it , I am >>> > happy that he gave me the chance to express those ideas and >>> > expect nothing more . >>> > >>> > An asset creation pipeline is essential for Realxtend , >>> > there is no doubt about it . Some Ideas are for solitary or >>> > even "offline" creative environments and other ideas are for >>> > collaborative environments . The logical conclusion to make >>> > in this case is that the final product will probably be a mix >>> > between the two paradigms. You speak of creating appealing >>> > contant , offline . Why would there even be an "offline" >>> > situation. Why not just bring a preview grid right there with >>> > you and view the content in world as you create it, where ever >>> > you are . >>> > >>> > IF you think that its "drama" to speak face to face with >>> > at least an avatar of a person before you decide if you can >>> > work together , then you are Naeve in the extreme as to how >>> > collaborative work gets done in this Environment . Why did you >>> > use such obviously inflammatory words such as "drama" , the SL >>> > crowd and the SL mindset to me anyways ? Since you directed >>> > these comments to me , quite evidently , can you tell me how >>> > you know for sure that anything I have ever done has been >>> > drama ? Can you tell me how I stand for the SL mindset when >>> > I am a strident Taiga supporter while you are not , you openly >>> > support vanilla opensim or "opensim+modrex" which is much >>> > closer to basic SL than Taiga could ever be . You said these >>> > things in an attempt to debase my points of view and get me >>> > all fired up, but you failed miserably because you are >>> > clueless . While you are out there, not even running a Taiga >>> > world grid of your own at present but rather theorizing and >>> > bombastically pontificating your points of view . There are >>> > others out there trying to find productive ways in which >>> > people can leverage the platform and thus have a means of >>> > being here and creating the amazing content that we all >>> > enjoy . Be realistic and respectful of others . Especially >>> > when its questionable if this is truly your community if you >>> > dont support the communities ideals . >>> > >>> > I am hardly the person that you need to explain the need of an >>> > asset pipeline to . We are soo far behind in pipelining >>> > content into Rex that We are looking at a years worth of work >>> > just to do this . >>> > >>> > You jump on my ideas , when I am into community building and >>> > thus making the entire Realxtend Taiga platform stronger for >>> > all .. A grid like this with its strong community of content >>> > creators would be interconnected to your grid as well . Thus >>> > your grid would be stronger with a strong and thriving >>> > community of content creators out there, backing you up ... >>> > And yet you complain when someone brings up collaborative >>> > ideas such as this ... Creating a situation where content can >>> > be easily accessed by simply autonomously logging on to a grid >>> > like this would be an amazing asset to you, and yet some of >>> > you act as if you dont even comprehend its value. This is >>> > because you do not value and realise the proper merits of the >>> > Taiga platform, you simply want the mesh added to opensim >>> > core . >>> > >>> > Your comments about SL .. >>> > >>> > Are very weak since at its core , the Taiga platform is >>> > built to not function Like SL. You dont even need to register >>> > to log on to the various seperate Taiga grids so your Hysteria >>> > about a walled SL type garden being created in Taiga is >>> > baseless . >>> > >>> > The Taiga concept is an anathema to the Closed Garden concept >>> > of SL , so why even present such basic statements to us and >>> > then act as if they are a revalation of any sort to this >>> > community . ALL you have done is to say , oh hey we should >>> > believe in the concept of Taiga .... To a community of people >>> > that should already embrace this vision since it is the very >>> > very basic conceptual idea behind Taiga ( the current known >>> > opensource realxtend project in development ) . IF a person >>> > wanted to create a walled garden like SL , they are certainly >>> > not going to attempt to do that in Taiga , if they have any >>> > brains , because as we showed last week , anybody can log into >>> > a public Taiga grid without first creating an account at each >>> > Walled Gardens Website . >>> > >>> > In fact , these guys that come in here and talk about >>> > opensim+modrex are not true parts of the Realxtend >>> > community ... They are actually part of the opensim community >>> > and are always very careful to say Opensim+Modrex , rather >>> > than Taiga or other word choices that describe the Realxtend >>> > concept. These people do not embrace the Taiga Ideal , so >>> > they have to use the words opensim+modrex , which means >>> > Vanilla opensim with a module included . Its up to you to >>> > decide who's opinion is more valid , a person who comes into >>> > the community, when something exciting like this happens and >>> > presents themself as an "expert" , or a person like myself who >>> > is a part of the community because she embraces the Rex >>> > concept in its entirity as it stands now . I dont present >>> > myself as an expert , I present myself as a practical user of >>> > the platform , who fully embraces the platform conceptually , >>> > as it is . >>> > >>> > >>> > These people want to take ownership and control of modrex >>> > away from the Taiga grid concept and simply add the mesh to >>> > vanilla opensim . Many also may passionately want this, >>> > because they want to run a solitary game platform using the >>> > technology . Which means they are actually creating walled >>> > gardens of there own with there games.. Which would be >>> > standing there all alone and not interconnected like taiga >>> > grids are . For example World of Warcraft is a walled garden >>> > just like SL is a walled garden . >>> > >>> > >>> > Cool down your emotions a bit , just because I have a >>> > different view of a world and want to try to build an active >>> > community of content creators doesnt mean that I am the Devil >>> > herself ( IE SL ) , especially when I fully embrace the >>> > Taiga platform , while I wonder if others do . Actually the >>> > concept which you constantly put forth to us , ( opensim >>> > +modrex ) is actually much closer to the SL concept than the >>> > one that I embrace (Taiga).. This is because in Taiga is is >>> > impossible or very difficult to create an SL type walled >>> > garden , while with Opensim+modrex it is very possible . >>> > >>> > -- >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend >>> > http://www.realxtend.org >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > -- >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend >>> > http://www.realxtend.org >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend >>> http://www.realxtend.org >>> >> >> -- >> http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend >> http://www.realxtend.org >> > > -- http://groups.google.com/group/realxtend http://www.realxtend.org
