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

[diva at metaverseink.com]

Around now, or last week, would probably be a good time to tag something 
stable :-)

I don't mind at all moving this refactoring to a branch, but since we 
have never done that I wouldn't even know what to do. I don't expect 
this to be bad. The transition to RESTComms was done without almost 
anyone noticing it, except the brave explorers in OSGrid who have to 
deal with having neighbors on all sorts of different versions. But 
except for the version mismatches, which are really impossible to manage 
from a development perspective, most people only noticed when suddenly 
OpenSim.ini didn't have the remoting port anymore. And RESTComms 
actually involved a complete replacement of the underlying protocol from 
Remoting to http+REST, which is not the case here -- the protocol won't 
change, at least not now.

Charles Krinke wrote:
> It is always a balance between keeping functionality in an evolving 
> project and refactoring and experimenting.
>
> I will support and encourage refactoring and experimentation with one 
> proviso. That proviso is a few paragraphs on the wiki giving clues to 
> allow those deploying OpenSim what is going on and how to work around 
> trunk during a period of refactoring and experimentation.
>
> Charles
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Mike Dickson <mike.dickson at hp.com>
> *To:* "opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de" <opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de>
> *Sent:* Thursday, April 30, 2009 8:57:24 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Opensim-dev] moving away from grid vs. standalone
>
> I'll echo a sentiment I've tried to express before. This sort of
> aggressive refactoring and experimentation is really important to the
> growth of OpenSim.  The "release" process has been focused on trying to
> figure out a stable point and snapshot-ing that. That places a burden on
> the "release coordinator" to poll folks for what that stable "snapshot"
> is.  IMO, ideally the heavy refactoring would happen on a branch or
> separate tree and then pushed to HEAD when it stabilizes. 
>
> Again, I'm completely for the heavy research  and refactoring focus.
> But IMO if for a shared project you want to do that you need to adopt a
> development approach that gracefully allows that to happen.
>
> Mike
>
>
> On Thu, 2009-04-30 at 15:37 +0000, Dahlia Trimble wrote:
> > We need to be careful about how things are broken and make repairs
> > expeditiously as we also hinder other developers if they are unable to
> > use their regions for development and testing.
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 3:01 PM, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com 
> <mailto:melanie at t-data.com>> wrote:
> >        Maybe these things need to be broken. We are almost locked
> >        into a
> >        rigid schema, now we still have a chance to go to true
> >        modularity
> >        and we should take it. After all, trunk is meant to be
> >        broken :)
> >       
> >       
> >        Melanie
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de <mailto: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/20090430/ae5d5b0a/attachment-0001.html>