[Opensim-dev] Perl vs C# UGAI?

[Stefan Andersson]

One aspect is that we need to foster a spawning culture; we can't have one project that everybody's trying to add to to it make suit everybodys need; that's just not how internet development works.
 
We need to get people to publish code on their own wikis, spawn separate sourceforge or berlios projects; an we will link to them, recommend some, even have some official add-on repository (think firefox)
 
but the CORE repository has to be focused on one thing, and one thing only: Getting a WORKING, TIGHT, STABLE reference implementation of a set of MODULAR SERVICES and STANDARD PROTOCOLS.
I think we're approaching our limit for how much code should be in that CORE repository. From now on, we need to spawn spin-offs.
/Stefan



> From: brianw at terrabox.com> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 11:30:50 -0500> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Perl vs C# UGAI?> > I couldn't agree more.> > My personal view of a project like OpenSim is that it is a reference> implementation of the OpenSim protocol(s). As such, it shouldn't concern> itself with containing every single implementation of the various> servers. > > I really like the idea of having a wiki page listing "OpemSim Protocol> based Projects" that end users can pick from. the opensimulator.org> website could focus on protocol specifics, and linking to specific> implementations with the core C# implementation downplayed as just a> reference implementation that may or may not be as stable or fast as 3rd> party implementations and utilities.> > This would also make it possible for us to take the add-in modules like> the recent bad behaving interface demo module and keep them in a> seperate "official add-ons" repository that people can overlay on the> core report. How that overlay is acheived can be worked out later. ;)> > I have to agree with Charles on the OSGrid concerns. I say leave it> using just the C# core reference implementation so it's a solid known> setup to test against. If we really want to semi-officially suport the> alternatives, then OSGrid can negotiate hosting of secondary testing> grids with the various implementations if the alternative creator> doesn't have a place to run their servers (I'm making an assumption of> resource availability here, which may or may not be possible).> > On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 10:04 -0400, Sean Dague wrote:> > On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 02:27:07PM +0100, Justin Clark-Casey wrote:> > > I'm very much in favour of the idea of alternative implementations of > > > the UGAI protocols.> > > > > > As James, has suggested, in other circumstances it would be good to > > > formally write down the protocol and advertise and discuss changes > > > beforehand. However, the problem is, as Michael and Sean say, is that > > > it's still in a state of considerable flux (this is Alpha code!). Trying > > > to formalize at this stage would considerably slow down development.> > > > > > I have to agree with Michael that we shouldn't have alternative > > > implementations in our own svn tree - it will cause considerable > > > confusion as to what OpenSim officially supports and what it doesn't. > > > And hypothetically, if Lulurun goes away for whatever reason > > > (hypothetically!) the onus to maintain it as an 'official' alternative > > > would fall on the OpenSim developers. Whether the Perl alternative > > > should really be the reference (not necessarily the best) implementation > > > is another argument, I think. I can see pros and cons for both.> > > > > > Having said that, it sounds like Lulurun is willing to maintain the code > > > to match changes in the protocol. Even if the code doesn't live inside > > > the OpenSim tree, I believe we could make an effort on an informal basis > > > to advertise and discuss proposed protocol changes before the fact > > > (unless the changes are very large, in which case things would have to > > > be done post-facto).> > > > Yes, we should have links to alternate implementations somewhere on the> > wiki. Honestly, I suspect that we'll end up with UGAI in at least perl,> > python, ASP.NET, java, and ruby by the end of the year that people are> > maintaining. That is a strength, not a weakness.> > > > -Sean> > > > _______________________________________________> > Opensim-dev mailing list> > Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> > https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev> > _______________________________________________> Opensim-dev mailing list> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20080403/d8a8c36e/attachment-0001.html>