[Opensim-dev] moving away from grid vs. standalone

[diva at metaverseink.com]

Stefan Andersson wrote:
> How about
>  
> ---
> [RegionResourceServices]
> ;GridService = OpenSim.Region.Communications.Hypergrid.dll, HGGridServices
> ;GridService = OpenSim.Region.Communications.Local.dll, LocalBackEndServices
>  
> GridService = OpenSim.Region.Communications.OGS1.dll, OGS1GridServices
>  
> [GridService]
> grid_server_url = "http://192.168.1.101:9000"
> grid_send_key = "null"
> grid_recv_key = "null"

The problem with specifying dlls *in this particular case* is that these 
things aren't entirely orthogonal/different. The Hypergrid dlls are a 
mashup of the other two. Therefore from a source code perspective it 
makes things a heck of a lot more complicated than they need to be if we 
simply merge things and use conditionals on configuration variables. For 
example, hyperlinks (part of grid services) is a really simple extension 
to LocalGrid services.

The issue of local vs remote services isn't entirely orthogonal either. 
Some parts of OGS1 use Local services -- the well know pattern of 
trying things locally first and if that doesn't work, proceed for a 
remote service call (e.g. OGS1 grid services does that).

I see why you want this, in abstract. If another service comes along, it 
can simply be added as a component. Or if someone writes, say, a 
completely different inventory service, its interface can be added as dll.

But in this particular case, for the code we already have, I think that 
having Local.dll, OGS1.dll and Hypergrid.dll is not working well, even 
if the configuration process is the one you suggest. The code is mess; 
things are _way_ more complicated than they need to be.

So, maybe, what we can do is merging these two ideas. We'll have only 
one dll (OpenSim.Region.ResourceServices.dll), but we'll specify things 
in OpenSim.ini the way that you suggest, so that if anyone comes along 
and wants to plug in a different inventory service, he can just specify 
the  other dll and an entry class name for it.

What do you think?


> [Security]
>  
> SessionAuthentication = {True|False}
> KeyAuthentication = {True|False}
> 
> ---
>  
> The constructor is being fed a config source, so the service can pick 
> out whatever it needs.
>  
> All the shipped grid services could move into one assembly, as we're 
> explicitly specifying the implementing calss.
>  
> I believe this approach would get us improved flexibility.
> 
> /Stefan