[Opensim-dev] OpenSimulator 0.7 (was incorrectly 0.6) Roadmap

[Melanie]

 From a creation standpoint, I'm not keen on meshes, specifically 
because I'm not good enough at any of the program needed to create 
them to really make use of them.

But, oh, the amazing content more gifted hands could make!

I'm all for not tying things up and allowing things. I wouldn't want 
to see prims go away, since prims is all i know how to use. But 
adding meshes, yes, nice one! :)

I believe refactoring SOP and possibly dropping SOG is in the cards, 
at that time, provision could be made to make SOP a container for 
more flexible object definitions.

Melanie


Stefan Andersson wrote:
> Adam,
>  
> one thing I've thought about for a while, is that mesh support could/should be part of OpenSim - ie, that objects in the scene should be able to provide a mesh to clients that support it - how would that fit with your work with the Rex client?
>  
> The rest of you,
>  
> how do you feel about that? I think it's in line with our ambition to not be tied in to any protocol-specific set of limitations.Of course, there's no shortage of problems arising with having two separate sets of object definitions, but if there's a will, there's a way.
>  
> So, is there a will?
> Best regards,Stefan AnderssonTribal Media AB Join the 3d web revolution : http://tribalnet.se/ 
> 
> 
> 
> From: adam at deepthink.com.auTo: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.deDate: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 20:02:48 -0400Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] OpenSimulator 0.7 (was incorrectly 0.6) Roadmap
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Raising my head here since DeepThink is doing that conversion. Bug me if your interested.
>  
> Adam
>  
> 
> 
> 
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Michael WrightSent: Thursday, 28 August 2008 2:17 PMTo: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.deSubject: Re: [Opensim-dev] OpenSimulator 0.7 (was incorrectly 0.6) Roadmap
>  
> By opensim modules for the Rex client. I actually meant modules for opensim to support the extra features that the Rex client supports. As far as I know, Rex are working on converting the changes that they made to opensim server, for their custom features, into opensim region modules. So that support for the Rex client could be added to any opensim region by loading those modules. Sorry for the confusion. But yeah the ideal solution on the client front is a useable working non GPL client. Until we can add features/GUI's to a clien, while at the same time work on opensim. Custom features/applications are very difficult. dan miller <danbmil99 at yahoo.com> wrote:
>> From: Michael Wright > +1000 to both of those but as you say, they need client side> changes. And with slow progress on OpenViewer. Its hard to> imagine when we could seriously think about them, outside of> opensim modules for the Rex client (which I think work is> progressing on) .Argh, the GPL dragon rears its ugly head yet again... can Rex allow non-GPL plug-ins when they derive their viewer from the Linden release?I see now that momentum on non-Linden capabilities are tied directly to developing a non-GPL viewer (ie OpenViewer). Maybe that's where I should spend my time, instead of constantly complaining about the licensing... (part of the solution and all that)-dan> > dan miller wrote: these are> probably feature requests that are too far out for a mere> 0.01 increment, but I thought I should throw them out there> anyway. They are both potentially non-Linden compatible,> and so I guess they won't get much traction until> OpenViewer is more mature.> > * Mesh prims. In 
talking to some folks about possible> corporate projects, this comes up as the #1 deal-killer wrt> Opensim. User-generated content is great, but the absolute> lack of any workflow from professional 3D tools (other than> paying someone to duplicate a build in SL format) keeps> Opensim tied to the mast of Linden's success/failure.> > * Real-time avatar control. Some lively discussion went on> at the Rex list about the idea of controlling an avatar> through a real-time protocol. The idea is to enable> algorithmic &/or advanced interface control. As a> simple use case, imagine a Wii-like device that allows you> to move your avatar's arm. Right now, there's no> simple way to do anything like that. There are also> important AI applications that are severely limited by the> animation-only model.> > Take these inputs as intended -- ideas for future> discussion.> > -danx0r> > Daniel B. Miller> aka danx0r> life is a simulation> > _______________________________________________> Opensim
-dev mailing list> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev> > > Send instant messages to your online friends> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com> _______________________________________________> Opensim-dev mailing list> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev_______________________________________________Opensim-dev mailing listOpensim-dev at lists.berlios.dehttps://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>  
>  Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev