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

[Melanie]

Well, region modules make the most sense. The new style region 
modules especially, since they have better loading/unloading and are 
now suitable for this.
Also, region modules can reference each other even when in spearate 
DLLs. So, one packager may want to put LocalComms and GridComms into 
one DLL and not expose any config, while another one may put local 
comms into a dll itself and not ship grid comms at all. yet another 
may make separate DLLs and ref local services in grid services.

Finally, I have an interface in Scene that allows multiple region 
modules to share an interface - the script engines use it. Region 
modules are infinitely flexible there.

So, we don't need
ILocalUserService
IGridUserService
IHGUserService

all we need is

IUserService

Each of the stacked modules can then decide whether it is it's call 
or not. That would be via strings in config, as it is for other 
region modules now. As done in permissions, I have found new 
semantics to call events with return values as well, where I can 
harvest all return values, not just the latest. There is a lot more 
flexibility in all of this than has been used up to now.

I'll be happy to talk about how and create skeletons for this as well.

Melanie


diva at metaverseink.com wrote:
> OK, let me backtrack. There are really two separate issues going on.
> 
> a) One issue is the means by which we specify different service 
> connectors. The dlls + entry class is the right way. Unfortunately, that 
> isn't in place yet, and I'm not sure I'm the right person to do it :-/
> 
> b) Another issue is whether Local/OGS1/Hypergrid are really alternatives 
> in the true sense of the word, just like MySql is an alternative to 
> SqlLite, or ODE is and alternative to Bullet. I don't think they are; I 
> think they are generalizations, in that precise order:
> OGS1=Local+more (you can see this in the dependencies)
> Hypergrid=OGS1+more (again, see the dependencies)
> Being generalizations, one can simplify things by having the most 
> general model, and configuring it to obtain the more specific behaviors. 
> (This is independent of how we split the model physically)
> 
> So, I guess I'm torn here. On the one hand, I can see how things would 
> improve dramatically if we had a plugin thing really going, whatever 
> plugin thing that would be.
> 
> On the other hand, the plugin thing doesn't exist, and I don't see it on 
> the horizon anytime soon. We're stuck with having to define behavior by 
> configuration variables, instead of dlls. Hence my original proposal, 
> which did *not* include specifying dlls.
> 
> [I'm having the same feeling I had just before I did RESTComms... so 
> this may very well end up going Melanie's suggestion of region modules 
> again... or I'll just give up trying to fix this in general, and focus 
> on the much narrower things that matter to me which are the security 
> configurations for the hypergrid -- the hell with OGS1]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
> 
>