Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Aidan Thornton]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 3:09 PM, Lance Corrimal
 wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 20:49:59 schrieb Joe Linden:
>
>> **we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and
>> we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a
>> successful program*."
>
>
> then... how about... opensourcing the SERVER (like someone pretty high up
> suggested several years ago)?
>
>
> and there's no reason to be afraid that giving away the other half of the
> software would cause you longtime harm anyways...
>
> ...after all, the grid is more than server & client. the grid also is all
> those boxes that it is running on... no way that a competitior could pull
> 1 PCs out of a hat on short notice.
>
> on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following
> predictions:
>
> - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has
> been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP
> (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect
> to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber
> service.

XMPP doesn't actually scale that well, unfortunately; a lot of the
really big installs actually run their own protocol internally with
better scaling.

> - a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the
> various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe.

Unlikely. Transactions are hard.

There's some low-hanging fruit with regards to LSL support though. In
theory, one should be able to statically verify nearly all traditional
non-Mono LSL scripts, and then optionally compile them down to native
code. (The static verification would probably take a day or two to
code; compilation down to native code would take longer and have more
interesting tradeoffs. Direct threading might be a better approach.)
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tateru Nino]

It isn't just the messages that need to scale. Messaging is probably the
bottom of the list of use-cases for groups in practice. It's the bit
where most of the actual *problems* show up, but it isn't actually as
important a part of group scaling as the rest of the group functions.

On 17/04/2010 11:27 PM, Carlo Wood wrote:
> Scaling of group messages is simple however.
> With one server per group you get a long way.
>
> Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average.
> Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so
> you can keep adding groups to a server until
> the total number of group members is around 20,000.
> Then you add a server.
>
> The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS
> system, for example .groups.secondlife.com
>
> And if you throw a good socket library against it
> (not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000
> users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise.
> Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed
> in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server
> and they can tell you how to do that.
>
> On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote:
>   
>> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K
>> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people
>> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
>> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a 
>> quite heavy loaded system.
>>
>> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with 
>> multiple
>> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting
>> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.
>> 
>   

-- 
Tateru Nino
http://dwellonit.taterunino.net/

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Carlo Wood]

Scaling of group messages is simple however.
With one server per group you get a long way.

Lets say, 2000 connections per server on average.
Usually about 1/10th of the users is online, so
you can keep adding groups to a server until
the total number of group members is around 20,000.
Then you add a server.

The routing to the servers can be done by using the DNS
system, for example .groups.secondlife.com

And if you throw a good socket library against it
(not one using select or poll), you can add to 20,000
users per server; that still won't be a problem CPU-wise.
Unfortunately some kernel tweaking and expertise is needed
in that case, but just hire some IRC admin of a large server
and they can tell you how to do that.

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 06:20:21PM +0200, Dale Glass wrote:
> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K
> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people
> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a 
> quite heavy loaded system.
> 
> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple
> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting
> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.

-- 
Carlo Wood 
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Erik Anderson]

Hey, if you're looking for a review of message queueing agents, I ran across
an SL review of MQs a while back when trying to choose one for our company's
back end COMET server.  It had value in my research and may have for someone
trying to come up with chat alternatives...

http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/Message_Queue_Evaluation_Notes


On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 9:20 AM, Dale Glass  wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> > - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit
> has
> > been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to
> XMPP
> > (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to
> connect
> > to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber
> > service.
> Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL.
>
> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be
> 70K
> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K
> people
> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably
> a
> quite heavy loaded system.
>
> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with
> multiple
> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but
> supporting
> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.
>
> Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50
> concurrent users.
>
> >
> > - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed
> Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot
> better.
>
> If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love
> it.
>
>
> But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-)
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Glen Canaday]

> deal with the law enforcement people
>
Chuckle @ wording ;)

--GC
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

a program that says things could still be protected under free speech,
and could be considered art, and manufacturing pistols isn't illegal,
even if some people kill people with them, but of course, if you build a
pistol, and then use it to kill someone, then you probably would have to
deal with the law enforcement people

On 16/4/2010 13:34, Tayra Dagostino wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200
> Carlo Wood  wrote:
> 
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
>>> LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
>>> a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
>>> a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done
>>> to either LLC or TP code)
>>
>> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden
>> of being legally liable for ANYTHING.
> 
> so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of
> harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL
> you cannot take me in front of a judges?
> 
> or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to
> nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and
> nobody can tell something to me?
> 
> your fantastic world is very nice
> 
> GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is
> about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about
> developer liability in front of him software...
> ___
> 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
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzzsACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmWPdACff0XEvLLY/mjC6hvbWdg+iSJZ
/FAAnj2IJs5ovYbqjh0lkkurcprNeLjo
=MJIM
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

With so many machines at their disposal, why things don't work in a more
distributed way? I can't understand why there is so much centralized stuff.

On 16/4/2010 13:20, Dale Glass wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote:
>> - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has 
>> been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP 
>> (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to 
>> connect 
>> to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber 
>> service.
> Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL.
> 
> IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K
> people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people
> end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
> you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a 
> quite heavy loaded system.
> 
> Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple
> conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting
> 70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.
> 
> Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50
> concurrent users.
> 
>>
>> - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed
> Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot better.
> 
> If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love it.
> 
> 
> But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-)
> 
> ___
> 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
> 
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkvIzecACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmX8KgCfQ2Jt8ZmbKPxj+sdaH/2PXkd3
WxAAnAh/2iSUHc99BrA3UlcEvY9RA7Dw
=yXOz
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Gareth Nelson]

The warranty disclaimer protects from liability for mistakes, not maliciousness

On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 5:34 PM, Tayra Dagostino
 wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200
> Carlo Wood  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
>> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
>> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
>> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done
>> > to either LLC or TP code)
>>
>> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden
>> of being legally liable for ANYTHING.
>
> so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of
> harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL
> you cannot take me in front of a judges?
>
> or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to
> nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and
> nobody can tell something to me?
>
> your fantastic world is very nice
>
> GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is
> about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about
> developer liability in front of him software...
> ___
> 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
>



-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tayra Dagostino]

On Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:11:22 +0200
Carlo Wood  wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done
> > to either LLC or TP code)
> 
> That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden
> of being legally liable for ANYTHING.

so if i create a software and with few printf i broadcast a lot of
harassment, injuries, falsity about you and i sign my software as GPL
you cannot take me in front of a judges?

or i write and distribute a software like worm, something written to
nuke remote systems or ddos networks, i append GPL license to it and
nobody can tell something to me?

your fantastic world is very nice

GPL protect the software, not developers, "as is" and "no warranty" is
about the requirement a user can ask to the developer, not about
developer liability in front of him software...
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Dale Glass]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has 
> been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP 
> (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to 
> connect 
> to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber 
> service.
Very likely, but it doesn't necessarily work for SL.

IIRC, the main issue with the group limit and IM is scaling. There can be 70K
people online. Suppose you bump the groups limit to 100, and those 70K people
end up belonging to 50 groups on average. Now you've double IM load, and if
you remember the days where most group chat sessions failed, it's probably a 
quite heavy loaded system.

Jabber would have the same issue: how to handle 70K people, many with multiple
conversations and conferences. A small jabber server is easy, but supporting
70K logged in accounts is a serious undertaking.

Of course none of this would be an issue for a third party grid with 50
concurrent users.

> 
> - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed
Region crossing is complicated in SL. OpenSim doesn't seem to do a lot better.

If you'd be willing to improve it there, I'm sure many people would love it.


But I agree, cool things could happen as a result :-)

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Carlo Wood]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:28:00AM -0400, Robert Martin wrote:
> LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
> a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
> a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
> either LLC or TP code)

That is nonsense! An open source developer can NOT bare the burden
of being legally liable for ANYTHING.

If Linden Lab wants to put in their TPV the warning that they will
remove the account of developers (users thus) that don't do they ask,
go ahead.

But under no circumstances any OS dev in their right mind will
work on a project if they will be legally liable for it!

This is just too insane for words.

-- 
Carlo Wood 
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Carlo Wood]

Provided the changes can be made without being liable for damages 

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 04:09:19PM +0200, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following 
> predictions:
> 
> - 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has 
> been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP 
> (including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to 
> connect 
> to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber 
> service.
> 
> - 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed
> 
> - a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the 
> various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe.
> 
> imagine the possibilities.

-- 
Carlo Wood 
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Discrete Dreamscape]

"Many coders would likely accept liability when being paid well, or possibly
at all. But in the case of open source code created as a hobby, the GPL idea
of no warranty has so far been successful in the community because code can
be inspected by its users, and because the users can verify, alter, and fix
any problems in it on their own, so they shouldn't claim fault on the
developer when it was their own choice to use the code. However, in LL's
case, they don't even get to choose whether they use your code. Anyone can
basically force it upon their service to feel the effects of using arbitrary
viewer code. Thus, since there is no choice, ultimately some liability is
inherent."

Basically, consent does agree on both sides. LL is forced into the situation
by the nature of their service, and starting April 30th, developers consent
as well, if they wish to use the service.

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:57 AM, Gareth Nelson wrote:

> The problem with that is a contract requires assent on both sides
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Discrete Dreamscape
>  wrote:
> > It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever
> protections
> > you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV
> > asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not
> explicit
> > in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract
> > between you and LL.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes
> >  wrote:
> >>
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> >> Hash: SHA1
> >>
> >> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of
> >> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or
> >> distribute
> >>
> >> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote:
> >> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson
> >> >  wrote:
> >> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
> >> >> start was missing
> >> >>
> >> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY.
> >> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links
> >> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client
> >> > crashing or ...
> >> >
> >> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not
> >> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing
> >> > bugs in said code so
> >> >
> >> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
> >> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
> >> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
> >> > either LLC or TP code)
> >> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> >> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> >> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
> >>
> >> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV
> >> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm
> >> =t1M5
> >> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> >> ___
> >> 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
> >
>
>
>
> --
> “Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
> everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
> Printcrime by Cory Doctrow
>
> Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
> See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
>
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Gareth Nelson]

The problem with that is a contract requires assent on both sides

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 4:47 PM, Discrete Dreamscape
 wrote:
> It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever protections
> you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV
> asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not explicit
> in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract
> between you and LL.
>
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes
>  wrote:
>>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of
>> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or
>> distribute
>>
>> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote:
>> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson
>> >  wrote:
>> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
>> >> start was missing
>> >>
>> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY.
>> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links
>> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client
>> > crashing or ...
>> >
>> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not
>> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing
>> > bugs in said code so
>> >
>> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
>> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
>> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
>> > either LLC or TP code)
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
>> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
>> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>>
>> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV
>> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm
>> =t1M5
>> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>> ___
>> 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
>



-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Discrete Dreamscape]

It's possible to willingly agree to liability and wave whatever protections
you wish that are normally under the GPL, which seems to be what the TPV
asks you to do. The issue most people seem to have is that it's not explicit
in this regard and it also doesn't make it clear that it is a contract
between you and LL.

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:42 AM, Tigro Spottystripes <
tigrospottystri...@gmail.com> wrote:

> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of
> GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or
> distribute
>
> On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson 
> wrote:
> >> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
> >> start was missing
> >>
> > suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY.
> > how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links
> > getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client
> > crashing or ...
> >
> > anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not
> > limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing
> > bugs in said code so
> >
> > LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
> > a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
> > a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
> > either LLC or TP code)
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV
> jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm
> =t1M5
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

from what i understand, according to GPL, developers and distributers of
GPL'd stuff are _*NOT*_ liable for any GPL code they create, modify or
distribute

On 15/4/2010 12:28, Robert Martin wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson  
> wrote:
>> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
>> start was missing
>>
> suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY.
> how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links
> getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client
> crashing or ...
> 
> anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not
> limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing
> bugs in said code so
> 
> LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
> a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
> a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
> either LLC or TP code)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkvHM9UACgkQ8ZFfSrFHsmUi3gCdF9rXeLoWwsxEF1bwaXjSeqmV
jWsAn3i1Dpa0KjNrokHYukjq4YONoGcm
=t1M5
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Robert Martin]

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Gareth Nelson  wrote:
> A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
> start was missing
>
suggestion for the next meeting MAKE IT TEXT CHAT ONLY.
how much of the meeting was lost to overhead related to voice links
getting garbled or relaying info being given in voice or a client
crashing or ...

anyway i think that the core problem of the current TPVp is not
limiting the liability of a developer to 1 code he changed 2 fixing
bugs in said code so

LL is only liable for Linden Core Code*
a TPV is only liable for code changed from LLC**
a user is liable for actions on the grid (and whatever changes done to
either LLC or TP code)
-- 
Robert L Martin
* said liability is limited to fixing code and cost of replacement of
damaged "goods" in the case of inventory loss or damage to a region
** said liability is limited to fixing code unless the code can be
shown to be deliberately unfit for purpose or otherwise illegal
according to local state or federal law (local to include the LL TOS
as currently amended).
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Gareth Nelson]

A quick note on that - this is not the whole meeting, some of the
start was missing

On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 2:08 AM, VR Hacks  wrote:
> Michael wrote in part:
>
>> Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not
>> attend?
>
> I see someone has already posted a link to the full chat text transcript on
> the wiki.
>
> Gareth Nelson was kind enough to provide the voice recording of the meeting,
> which can be found here:
>
> http://bit.ly/TPVPbrownBag1
>
> You can also access it via our vrhacks channel on iTunes. Hth!
>
> Angela Talamasca (in-world)
> MA Forensic Psychology
>
> 
> VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog
> VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter
> VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube
> Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap
> Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient
> --
> "Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are
> infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde
>
> ___
> 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
>



-- 
“Lanie, I’m going to print more printers. Lots more printers. One for
everyone. That’s worth going to jail for. That’s worth anything.” -
Printcrime by Cory Doctrow

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Lance Corrimal]

Am Mittwoch, 14. April 2010 20:49:59 schrieb Joe Linden:

> **we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and
> we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a
> successful program*." 


then... how about... opensourcing the SERVER (like someone pretty high up 
suggested several years ago)?


and there's no reason to be afraid that giving away the other half of the 
software would cause you longtime harm anyways...

...after all, the grid is more than server & client. the grid also is all 
those boxes that it is running on... no way that a competitior could pull 
1 PCs out of a hat on short notice.

on the other hand, I would like to bet actual money on the following 
predictions:

- 48 hours after the server code is out in the open, the 25 groups limit has 
been lifted, AND the whole IM/group chat subsystem has been migrated to XMPP 
(including voice via XMPP); another day and there's the possibility to connect 
to jabber.sl.net with any xmpp client, AND talk to friends at any jabber 
service.

- 72 hours after the server code is out in the open, SVC-472 is fixed

- a few weeks later, all communications between client and server, and the 
various server subsystems, has been ported to tcp/ssl and is transaction safe.

imagine the possibilities.


bye,
LC
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tigro Spottystripes]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

some TPVs might be released under licenses that do assign
responsibilities, legal liabilities etc to developers and/or
distributers, the TPVP shouldn't attempt to override any license applied
to any TPV

On 15/4/2010 09:13, Aleric Inglewood wrote:
> I thought it would make more sense (I still have hope) to say this now,
> and not wait till 30 April.
> 
> Also I have decided that Linden Lab does not deserve the 40 hours
> per week that I spend volunteering on the snowglobe sources.
> Lately I have done less because my motivation was gone due to
> the policy, and there has been a long break because I suffer from
> something like carpel tunnel, but over all I DO spend that amount
> of time on a project that I am devoted to.
> 
> If the TPV policy is not going to address FULLY that any open source
> developers remain completely free of liability as stated in the GPL
> license
> 
> [to recap:
> 
> [...] THE ENTIRE RISK AS
> TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU [the user].
> SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL
> NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
> 
> [...] IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW [...]
> WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
> REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
> INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
> OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
> TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY
> YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER
> PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
> POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.
> 
> ]
> 
> Because of the parts in the [...] it may or may not be POSSIBLE to make
> developers
> liable through the TPV policy, I don't care. I don't want to run the
> risk that the TPV
> makes me liable, so it should not contain any words that could be
> interpreted
> as such.
> 
> I am sorry to say that I doubt that this will come to a resolution,
> because Joe already
> has said that he can only take SMALL changes and is not looking for a
> rewrite. He also
> said that he can only take it to the lawyers, but he has no power to
> actually enforce
> anything, it is not up to him.
> 
> I will probably start maintaining another TPV specifically for some
> opengrid grid.
> 
> The REASON I wanted to work on Snowglobe is because I believe that all open
> source projects are equal. We are not competitors (some devs of certain
> TPV(s)
> might take that to heart). I wanted to work there where my bug fixes and
> improvements would benefit all. But exactly for that reason I cannot standby
> when other open source projects that derive from Snowglobe are bullied into
> termination of their project and/or are forced to give up the freedom to
> make
> their own decisions, the only benefit of being an OS dev.
> 
> Sad,
> Aleric Inglewood
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Joe Linden  > wrote:
> 
> For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual
> words I said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that
> quote:  "/ //we've had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit
> of OS //... and we're fully committed to redoubling our commitment
> to make this a successful program/."  Was it infuriating that we
> have internal debates from time to time on how we staff our
> projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling our efforts in
> many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful project for
> the OS community than it has been in the past?  I was actually
> making a comment that we've not done this very well to date (in
> fact, we've sucked at it), and we're committed to many changes to
> improve the situation.
> 
> Either way, we're sorry to see you go.
> 
> -- joe
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson
> mailto:nexisentertainm...@gmail.com>>
> wrote:
> 
> And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights.  We've been
> over this
> already.  And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only
> thing I
> can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy
> about it.
> 
> I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna,
> but both
> the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit"
> comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not
> deserve any
> further OSS development work from me.
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote:
> > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your
> > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me
> if I
> > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you h

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Aleric Inglewood]

I thought it would make more sense (I still have hope) to say this now,
and not wait till 30 April.

Also I have decided that Linden Lab does not deserve the 40 hours
per week that I spend volunteering on the snowglobe sources.
Lately I have done less because my motivation was gone due to
the policy, and there has been a long break because I suffer from
something like carpel tunnel, but over all I DO spend that amount
of time on a project that I am devoted to.

If the TPV policy is not going to address FULLY that any open source
developers remain completely free of liability as stated in the GPL
license

[to recap:

[...] THE ENTIRE RISK AS
TO THE QUALITY AND PERFORMANCE OF THE PROGRAM IS WITH YOU [the user].
SHOULD THE PROGRAM PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU ASSUME THE COST OF ALL
NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.

[...] IN NO EVENT UNLESS REQUIRED BY APPLICABLE LAW [...]
WILL ANY COPYRIGHT HOLDER, OR ANY OTHER PARTY WHO MAY MODIFY AND/OR
REDISTRIBUTE THE PROGRAM AS PERMITTED ABOVE, BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR DAMAGES,
INCLUDING ANY GENERAL, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES ARISING
OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THE PROGRAM (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES SUSTAINED BY
YOU OR THIRD PARTIES OR A FAILURE OF THE PROGRAM TO OPERATE WITH ANY OTHER
PROGRAMS), EVEN IF SUCH HOLDER OR OTHER PARTY HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES.

]

Because of the parts in the [...] it may or may not be POSSIBLE to make
developers
liable through the TPV policy, I don't care. I don't want to run the risk
that the TPV
makes me liable, so it should not contain any words that could be
interpreted
as such.

I am sorry to say that I doubt that this will come to a resolution, because
Joe already
has said that he can only take SMALL changes and is not looking for a
rewrite. He also
said that he can only take it to the lawyers, but he has no power to
actually enforce
anything, it is not up to him.

I will probably start maintaining another TPV specifically for some opengrid
grid.

The REASON I wanted to work on Snowglobe is because I believe that all open
source projects are equal. We are not competitors (some devs of certain
TPV(s)
might take that to heart). I wanted to work there where my bug fixes and
improvements would benefit all. But exactly for that reason I cannot standby
when other open source projects that derive from Snowglobe are bullied into
termination of their project and/or are forced to give up the freedom to
make
their own decisions, the only benefit of being an OS dev.

Sad,
Aleric Inglewood


On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:49 PM, Joe Linden  wrote:

> For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual words
> I said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that quote:  "* **we've
> had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and we're
> fully committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a successful
> program*."  Was it infuriating that we have internal debates from time to
> time on how we staff our projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling
> our efforts in many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful
> project for the OS community than it has been in the past?  I was actually
> making a comment that we've not done this very well to date (in fact, we've
> sucked at it), and we're committed to many changes to improve the situation.
>
> Either way, we're sorry to see you go.
>
> -- joe
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson  > wrote:
>
>> And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights.  We've been over this
>> already.  And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I
>> can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it.
>>
>> I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both
>> the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit"
>> comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any
>> further OSS development work from me.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote:
>> > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your
>> > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I
>> > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility
>> > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name.
>> >
>> >
>> > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of
>> > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP
>> > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to
>> > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less
>> > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested.
>> >
>> >
>> > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law
>> > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft
>> > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as
>> > that is.
>> >
>>

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[VR Hacks]

Michael wrote in part:

> Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not
> attend?

I see someone has already posted a link to the full chat text transcript on 
the wiki.

Gareth Nelson was kind enough to provide the voice recording of the meeting, 
which can be found here:

http://bit.ly/TPVPbrownBag1

You can also access it via our vrhacks channel on iTunes. Hth!

Angela Talamasca (in-world)
MA Forensic Psychology


VR Hacks Blog: http://bit.ly/VRHacksBlog
VR Hacks Twitter: http://bit.ly/VRHacksTwitter
VR Hacks YouTube: http://bit.ly/VRHacksYouTube
Digital DNA in SL: http://bit.ly/VRHacksSLmap
Digital DNA in Blue Mars: http://bit.ly/BMclient
--
"Ordinary riches can be stolen, real riches cannot. In your soul are 
infinitely precious things that cannot be taken from you." - Oscar Wilde

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Joe Linden]

For those watching without the benefit of a transcript or the actual words I
said in the meeting yesterday, here was the rest of that quote:  "* **we've
had a lot of internal debate around cost/benefit of OS **... and we're fully
committed to redoubling our commitment to make this a successful program*."
Was it infuriating that we have internal debates from time to time on how we
staff our projects, or infuriating because we are redoubling our efforts in
many ways to make this a more successful and meaningful project for the OS
community than it has been in the past?  I was actually making a comment
that we've not done this very well to date (in fact, we've sucked at it),
and we're committed to many changes to improve the situation.

Either way, we're sorry to see you go.

-- joe

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:33 AM, Rob Nelson
wrote:

> And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights.  We've been over this
> already.  And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I
> can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it.
>
> I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both
> the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit"
> comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any
> further OSS development work from me.
>
>
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote:
> > Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your
> > concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I
> > couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility
> > with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name.
> >
> >
> > The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of
> > the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP
> > before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to
> > them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less
> > concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested.
> >
> >
> > As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law
> > they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft
> > owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as
> > that is.
> >
> >
> > If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some of us can
> > deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference seems to
> > be the biggest problem for you.
> >
> >
> > Ron Festa
> > Virtual Worlds Admin
> > Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
> > PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
> > Phone: 732-474-8583
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson
> >  wrote:
> > I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of
> > my
> > concerns.
> >
> > [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of
> > internal debate
> > around cost/benefit of OS
> >
> > ^ That was all I needed to hear.  Debate's effectively over.
> >
> > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
> >
> >
> > > Rob,
> > >
> > > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> > >
> > > -- Joe
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson
> > >  wrote:
> > > It's already reached a point where LL has told us,
> > to our
> > > faces, that
> > > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our
> > opinion
> > > doesn't
> > > mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to
> > discussion,
> > > just as
> > > there's no use continuing TPV development.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin
> > wrote:
> > > > To Whom It May Concern:
> > > >
> > > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this
> > inquiry due to
> > > the recent
> > > > influx of new topic related...or should I say
> > unrelated to
> > > the
> > > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when
> > I open my
> > > email, I
> > > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to
> > the recent
> > > changes
> > > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that
> > this is
> > > not related
> > > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> > > >
> > > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these
> > discussions
> > > to a
> > > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource
> > development
> > > questions are
> > > > not lost in the flames, complain

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Rob Nelson]

And yet, it does restrict GPL distribution rights.  We've been over this
already.  And I'd like to see where the FSF OKed it, the only thing I
can turn up on Google is Richard Stallman not being too happy about it.

I already changed the viewer I used to be working on to Luna, but both
the GPL incompatabilities and this rather infuriating "cost/benefit"
comment by Joe have resulted in me deciding that LL does not deserve any
further OSS development work from me.


On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 14:11 -0400, Ron Festa wrote:
> Honestly I tried looking through my inbox to find out what your
> concerns were and why no one else addressed them so forgive me if I
> couldn't find them. The only problems I saw you had was compatibility
> with the GPLv2 and the use of "Life" in your viewer name. 
> 
> 
> The issues with Section 7 were in fact addressed and took up most of
> the meeting. Someone claimed they went as far as bringing the TPVP
> before the FSF to verify if its GPLv2 compliant and sadly according to
> them it is as its restricting a service not the code. Never the less
> concerns were brought up and productive changes were suggested.
> 
> 
> As for the branding this should be no argument. If in a court of law
> they can make Lindows change their name to Linspire because Microsoft
> owns *indows then LL can do the same with all the TPV's as stupid as
> that is.
> 
> 
> If these aren't your only concerns please share them so some of us can
> deliver them by proxy for you since the time zone difference seems to
> be the biggest problem for you.
> 
> 
> Ron Festa
> Virtual Worlds Admin
> Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
> PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
> Phone: 732-474-8583
> 
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 1:23 PM, Rob Nelson
>  wrote:
> I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of
> my
> concerns.
> 
> [12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of
> internal debate
> around cost/benefit of OS
> 
> ^ That was all I needed to hear.  Debate's effectively over.
> 
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
> 
> 
> > Rob,
> >
> > I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> >
> > -- Joe
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson
> >  wrote:
> > It's already reached a point where LL has told us,
> to our
> > faces, that
> > they are not going to change the policy, meaning our
> opinion
> > doesn't
> > mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to
> discussion,
> > just as
> > there's no use continuing TPV development.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin
> wrote:
> > > To Whom It May Concern:
> > >
> > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this
> inquiry due to
> > the recent
> > > influx of new topic related...or should I say
> unrelated to
> > the
> > > development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when
> I open my
> > email, I
> > > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to
> the recent
> > changes
> > > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that
> this is
> > not related
> > > to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> > >
> > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these
> discussions
> > to a
> > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource
> development
> > questions are
> > > not lost in the flames, complaints, and
> discussions related
> > to this
> > > specific topic?
> > >
> > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk
> about which
> > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already
> > impersonated or
> > > which part of the third party viewer policy they
> do not
> > like.
> > >
> > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to
> another
> > forum, I bet
> > > those who are truly interested in the opensource
> development
> > of the
> > > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to
> staying here
> > rather than
> > > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate
> LL and the
> > TPVP lets
> > > get together and share our mis

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Rob Nelson]

I decided to read the transcript and it did not address any of my
concerns.  

[12:21][Voice Transcript] Joe Linden: we've ha a lot of internal debate
around cost/benefit of OS

^ That was all I needed to hear.  Debate's effectively over.

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> 
> -- Joe
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson
>  wrote:
> It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our
> faces, that
> they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion
> doesn't
> mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to discussion,
> just as
> there's no use continuing TPV development.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> > To Whom It May Concern:
> >
> > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to
> the recent
> > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to
> the
> > development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my
> email, I
> > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent
> changes
> > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is
> not related
> > to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> >
> > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions
> to a
> > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development
> questions are
> > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related
> to this
> > specific topic?
> >
> > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which
> > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already
> impersonated or
> > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not
> like.
> >
> > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another
> forum, I bet
> > those who are truly interested in the opensource development
> of the
> > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here
> rather than
> > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the
> TPVP lets
> > get together and share our misery post".
> >
> > Respectfully & Best Regards,
> >
> > Jonathan Irvin
> > SL Resident of 5 Years.
> 
> 
> > ___
> > 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
> 
> 


___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Lance Corrimal]

Joe,

have a beer ;)



or would you rather have a gallon of WD40? ;)




Am Mittwoch 14 April 2010 schrieb Joe Linden:
> Rob,
> 
> I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> 
> -- Joe
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson 
wrote:
> > It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces,
> > that they are not going to change the policy, meaning our
> > opinion doesn't mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing
> > to discussion, just as there's no use continuing TPV
> > development.
> > 
> > On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> > > To Whom It May Concern:
> > > 
> > > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the
> > > recent influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated
> > > to the development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I
> > > open my email, I get 5-10 different topics and responses daily
> > > to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer policy and I
> > > feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related
> > > development at all.
> > > 
> > > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a
> > > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development
> > > questions are not lost in the flames, complaints, and
> > > discussions related to this specific topic?
> > > 
> > > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which
> > > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated
> > > or which part of the third party viewer policy they do not
> > > like.
> > > 
> > > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I
> > > bet those who are truly interested in the opensource
> > > development of the Second Life viewer would be more in tuned
> > > to staying here rather than wake up to read yet another
> > > unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and
> > > share our misery post".
> > > 
> > > Respectfully & Best Regards,
> > > 
> > > Jonathan Irvin
> > > SL Resident of 5 Years.
> > > ___
> > > 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

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Michael Dickson]

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 16:27 +, Joe Linden wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> 
> -- Joe

Is a transcript of this posted anywhere for those of us who could not
attend?

Thanks!

Mike



___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Tony Agudo]

Joe, is there a transcript/voice recording of the meeting available?

On Apr 14, 2010 12:27 PM, "Joe Linden"  wrote:

Rob,

I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?

-- Joe



On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson 
wrote:
>
> It's already...

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Rob Nelson]

Yes, I begin sleep at 6:00AM and frequently sleep until 2:30PM.

On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 09:27 -0700, Joe Linden wrote:
> Rob,
> 
> I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?
> 
> -- Joe
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson
>  wrote:
> It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our
> faces, that
> they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion
> doesn't
> mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to discussion,
> just as
> there's no use continuing TPV development.
> 
> 
> 
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> > To Whom It May Concern:
> >
> > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to
> the recent
> > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to
> the
> > development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my
> email, I
> > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent
> changes
> > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is
> not related
> > to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> >
> > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions
> to a
> > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development
> questions are
> > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related
> to this
> > specific topic?
> >
> > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which
> > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already
> impersonated or
> > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not
> like.
> >
> > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another
> forum, I bet
> > those who are truly interested in the opensource development
> of the
> > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here
> rather than
> > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the
> TPVP lets
> > get together and share our misery post".
> >
> > Respectfully & Best Regards,
> >
> > Jonathan Irvin
> > SL Resident of 5 Years.
> 
> 
> > ___
> > 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
> 
> 


___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Joe Linden]

Rob,

I take it you weren't at the meeting yesterday?

-- Joe

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 9:02 AM, Rob Nelson wrote:

> It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces, that
> they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion doesn't
> mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to discussion, just as
> there's no use continuing TPV development.
>
>
> On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> > To Whom It May Concern:
> >
> > I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent
> > influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the
> > development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I
> > get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes
> > for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related
> > to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> >
> > To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a
> > different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are
> > not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this
> > specific topic?
> >
> > I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which
> > Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or
> > which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like.
> >
> > Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet
> > those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the
> > Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than
> > wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets
> > get together and share our misery post".
> >
> > Respectfully & Best Regards,
> >
> > Jonathan Irvin
> > SL Resident of 5 Years.
> > ___
> > 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
>
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Rob Nelson]

It's already reached a point where LL has told us, to our faces, that
they are not going to change the policy, meaning our opinion doesn't
mean diddly to them.  There's no use continuing to discussion, just as
there's no use continuing TPV development.


On Wed, 2010-04-14 at 07:52 -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> To Whom It May Concern:
> 
> I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent
> influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the
> development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I
> get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes
> for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related
> to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
> 
> To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a
> different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are
> not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this
> specific topic?
> 
> I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which
> Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or
> which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like.
> 
> Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet
> those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the
> Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than
> wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets
> get together and share our misery post".
> 
> Respectfully & Best Regards,
> 
> Jonathan Irvin
> SL Resident of 5 Years.
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Robin Cornelius]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 2:27 PM, Ron Festa  wrote:
> I feel your frustration, however, this is the opensource-dev mailing list
> not the snowglobe-dev mailing list. Both SnowGlobe and TPV's are open source
> viewers based on Linden Lab's mainline viewer the only difference is
> Snowglobe is distributed by LL. Discussion on policies that effect open
> source development should be encouraged. If you only want to see stuff
> relating to SnowGlobe then either encourage LL create a snowglobe-dev list
> or configure your mail filters to only allow email related to snowglobe to
> enter your inbox from this list.


I agree, very important topics have been banging around here recently
that effect all opensource work with the Linden Labs code and
secondlife itsself, that said is there a call for a seperate
snowglobe-dev list? I certainly don't want to see this list change
much and it should stay a general opensource/secondlife type list but
it may be worth a list to focus specificly on snowglobe only topics?

Robin
___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Dale Glass]

On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 07:52:02AM -0500, Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> To Whom It May Concern:
> 
> I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent
> influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development
> of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different
> topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer
> policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related
> development at all.
Believe me, I'd much prefer to talk about something else.

But this issue makes it difficult for me to continue development. I believe
it is appropiate to discuss things that impede development on the development
mailing list.

> To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different
> forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the
> flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic?
That is fine with me, so long LL's presence on that list is assured.


> I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party
> Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the
> third party viewer policy they do not like.
I disagree. I believe development issues belong in the development list,
and since this issue threatens my development efforts I bring it to the
best place I know for it.

(note: I may not have been posting lately, but I do have work in progress)

> 
> Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those
> who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life
> viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read
> yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share
> our misery post".
I disagree yet again. I feel it actually *has* been productive, if only 
because Joe decided the unresolved issues warranted a conference yesterday
and another next tuesday.

For me it's not about "sharing misery", it's about getting a reaction and
answers from LL. And for that purpose I bring up things that I consider
relevant.

I thought the impersonation post was relevant because LL's response to
such things is important, and one of the things that will determine whether
SL development remains safe enough for me to get involved with, or not.

> 
> Respectfully & Best Regards,
> 
> Jonathan Irvin
> SL Resident of 5 Years.

Regards,

Dale Glass
SL Resident of 4 Years
Viewer and bot developer

___
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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Ron Festa]

I feel your frustration, however, this is the *opensource-dev* mailing list
*not* the *snowglobe-dev* mailing list. Both SnowGlobe and TPV's are open
source viewers based on Linden Lab's mainline viewer the only difference is
Snowglobe is distributed by LL. Discussion on policies that effect open
source development should be encouraged. If you only want to see stuff
relating to SnowGlobe then either encourage LL create a snowglobe-dev list
or configure your mail filters to only allow email related to snowglobe to
enter your inbox from this list.

Ron Festa
Virtual Worlds Admin
Division of Continuing Studies at Rutgers University
PGP key: http://bit.ly/b1ZyhY
Phone: 732-474-8583


On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 8:52 AM, Jonathan Irvin wrote:

> To Whom It May Concern:
>
> I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent
> influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development
> of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different
> topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer
> policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related
> development at all.
>
> To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different
> forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the
> flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic?
>
> I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party
> Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the
> third party viewer policy they do not like.
>
> Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those
> who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life
> viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read
> yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share
> our misery post".
>
> Respectfully & Best Regards,
>
> Jonathan Irvin
> SL Resident of 5 Years.
>
> ___
> 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

Re: [opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Dzonatas Sol]

+1

I  already trashed a few attempts to write an e-mail to try to say what 
you have.

Jonathan Irvin wrote:
> To Whom It May Concern:
>
> I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent 
> influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the 
> development of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I 
> get 5-10 different topics and responses daily to the recent changes 
> for the Third Party Viewer policy and I feel that this is not related 
> to SnowGlobe or related development at all.
>
> To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a 
> different forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are 
> not lost in the flames, complaints, and discussions related to this 
> specific topic?
>
> I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which 
> Third-Party Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or 
> which part of the third party viewer policy they do not like.
>
> Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet 
> those who are truly interested in the opensource development of the 
> Second Life viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than 
> wake up to read yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets 
> get together and share our misery post".
>
> Respectfully & Best Regards,
>
> Jonathan Irvin
> SL Resident of 5 Years.
> 
>
> ___
> 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

[opensource-dev] Requesting Linden Response: Please move TPVP Topics to a different mailing list

[Jonathan Irvin]

To Whom It May Concern:

I'm requesting Linden Lab's response to this inquiry due to the recent
influx of new topic related...or should I say unrelated to the development
of the SnowGlobe viewer.  Lately, when I open my email, I get 5-10 different
topics and responses daily to the recent changes for the Third Party Viewer
policy and I feel that this is not related to SnowGlobe or related
development at all.

To "clear the pipes", can we please move these discussions to a different
forum or list so valid OpenSource development questions are not lost in the
flames, complaints, and discussions related to this specific topic?

I do not feel it is valid in this forum to talk about which Third-Party
Viewers in the directory were already impersonated or which part of the
third party viewer policy they do not like.

Linden Labs, if you can please isolate this to another forum, I bet those
who are truly interested in the opensource development of the Second Life
viewer would be more in tuned to staying here rather than wake up to read
yet another unproductive "I hate LL and the TPVP lets get together and share
our misery post".

Respectfully & Best Regards,

Jonathan Irvin
SL Resident of 5 Years.
___
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