[Opensim-dev] Should the core OpenSim distribution carry manyscripting languages?
Justin Clark-Casey
jjustincc at googlemail.com
Tue Jun 3 20:50:48 UTC 2008
Michael Wright wrote:
> +1 too, I think we need to expand this to a more general "rule". And
> when new modules etc are added, ask ourselves do they really belong in
> the core. Or would they be better placed in a CPAN type repository.
>
> After our experience of trying adding custom features to the backend
> commuincations/servers. I'm actually leaning towards questioning if the
> backend servers should really even be part of the core. Or if we really
> should just have a "framework" for creating backend systems in core. I
> know this is most likely more extreme than most people's thoughts. But I
> do believe its going to come up more and more in the future, unless we
> only are ever going to support SL clone type applications.
Personally, I think at this stage its good to have Second Life backend
server implementations in core to serve as a development trellis. But I
do like where you're going.
What would be really good is if we could evolve the current reference
servers to implement the framework which makes it much easier to create
the other implementations, both SL and non-SL. But then, as our dear
founder, you know that :D
>
>
> */Dr Scofield <DrScofield at xyzzyxyzzy.net>/* wrote:
>
> Chris Down wrote:
> > +1 here.
> >
> > I agree with everything Justin has said.
> >
> +1 here. particularly the python bit :-D
>
> cheers,
> dr scofield
> > Regards
> >
> > Chris Down
> >
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: opensim-dev-bounces at lists.berlios.de [mailto:opensim-dev-
> >> bounces at lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of Justin Clark-Casey
> >> Sent: 02 June 2008 01:44
> >> To: opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> >> Subject: [Opensim-dev] Should the core OpenSim distribution carry
> >> manyscripting languages?
> >>
> >> Hi there,
> >>
> >> Last week, Kinoc was kind enough to write an implementation of Yield
> >> Prolog where YP is translated into underlying C# for compilation
> (in the
> >> same manner as our current LSL support). This patch was included in
> >> OpenSim in r4927.
> >>
> >> I have nothing against Prolog (admittedly I have never had the
> chance to
> >> pick up) and certainly nothing against Kinoc. However, I am
> concerned
> >> that by including many scripting languages in the OpenSim core
> >> distribution (if Prolog, why not Javascript, Ruby, Python, etc,
> etc.) we
> >> incur more negatives than positives. Firstly, I'm concerned that a
> >> proportion of this code (particularly that which no core
> committer has
> >> an interest in) will at some point slip into decay, particularly
> if the
> >> original contributor has moved on to other things. We've already
> seen
> >> this happen with other areas of the code, such as the MSSQL database
> >> support.
> >>
> >> Secondly, if individual language modules do need to change in
> response
> >> to other OpenSim changes without a decay option (for example, in
> order
> >> that they can still compile), this places a higher burden on the
> core
> >> committers and makes it more costly to enhance the codebase in
> general.
> >>
> >> Thirdly, I'm concerned that the more code we have of this nature
> >> (particular code which compiles script into c#), the more potential
> >> security holes we have. This isn't too much of a concern right
> now but
> >> will be come more of an issue in the future.
> >>
> >> Therefore, I would argue that OpenSimulator should only include
> in its
> >> core distribution support for a few scripting languages. In my
> opinion
> >> these would be LSL, maybe C# and possibly one other (maybe Python).
> >> Support for other languages would come as optional plugins,
> available
> >> either directly from the author or from some satellite repository
> >> (perhaps similar to Perl's CPAN or PHP's PEAR). I would personally
> >> prefer to see the core OpenSim distribution kept relatively lean
> and mean.
> >>
> >> If necessary, I am happy to make any necessary infrastructure
> changes to
> >> make language plugins possible/easier (which probably also means
> making
> >> much needed enhancements to the plugin system).
> >>
> >> What do other people think?
> >>
> >> Regards,
> >>
> >> --
> >> justincc
> >> Justin Clark-Casey
> >> http://justincc.wordpress.com
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> 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
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> dr dirk husemann ---- virtual worlds research ---- ibm zurich
> research lab
> SL: dr scofield ---- drscofield at xyzzyxyzzy.net ----
> http://xyzzyxyzzy.net/
> RL: hud at zurich.ibm.com - +41 44 724 8573 -
> http://www.zurich.ibm.com/~hud/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sent from Yahoo! Mail
> <http://us.rd.yahoo.com/mailuk/taglines/isp/control/*http://us.rd.yahoo.com/evt=52418/*http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html>.
>
> A Smarter Email.
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
--
justincc
Justin Clark-Casey
http://justincc.wordpress.com
More information about the Opensim-dev
mailing list