[Opensim-dev] Raise minimum mono version to 2.6

Melanie melanie at t-data.com
Sun Jan 27 21:26:13 UTC 2013 

Since you have already stated that you will not support older
versions, our decision will not affect you in any way.

We have, for a long time, used mono 2.4 as the base simply because
versions of distros in common use don't offer it as part of their
repo. OpenSim targets not only Windows users but all operating
systems, including Linux. As long as people use versions of Linux
that don't natively supply 2.10, we cannot make it our baseline.
That is simply not open for discussion.

Melanie

On 27/01/2013 21:56, Ilan Tochner wrote:
> That's all well and good but saying we support mono version 2.6 and
> actually supporting it are two very different things.
> 
> Who here is willing to spend their time fixing problems that only appear in
> versions before mono 2.10? (this isn't a rhetorical question, if you are
> willing to commit to doing so then please reply and let the group know)
> 
> If anyone is, do you think that doing so is better use of our limited
> development resources than telling the person who had the problem to just
> upgrade to a slightly more modern version of mono that can be easily
> installed?
> 
> It makes sense not to drop support for old operating systems, as they
> usually can't be easily upgraded, but installing a newer version of mono is
> very simple when there are repositories you can just apt get / rpm it from.
> 
> What exactly will be served by saying mono 2.6 is supported when no one
> will invest (waste?) their time debugging for it? Wouldn't our users be
> better served by having OpenSim run as best as it can (given our limited
> resources) on a better performing version of mono that those users can
> easily install?
> 
> I know Kitely won't be spending resources on debugging for old mono
> releases so my only horse in this is wanting OpenSim to advance as quickly
> as it can without leaving people behind. Setting mono 2.10 as the baseline
> makes it easier for this open source dev community to accomplish this goal.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Ilan Tochner
> Co-Founder and CEO
> Kitely Ltd.
> 
> 
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 5:44 PM, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
> 
>> It has always been our policy to use the _lowest_ version of Mono
>> that we can get by on to support the largest possible number of
>> configurations and systems.
>>
>> This is not going to change.
>>
>> The feature required by recent code additions is found in Mono 2.6,
>> so we are discussing Mono 2.6 now. We are not discussing Mono 2.10.
>>
>> Melanie
>>
>> On 27/01/2013 15:32, Ilan Tochner wrote:
>> > If, as we both agree, OpenSim works differently with different versions
>> of
>> > mono then people are going to report bugs that exist when OpenSim is run
>> on
>> > mono versions prior to 2.10 that don't exist with mono version 2.10 and
>> > later.
>> >
>> > How many people are there in the OpenSim dev community that still
>> actively
>> > use a mono version prior to 2.10? In fact, AFAIK, many devs are already
>> > looking to see when they can safely move to mono 3.0. So, who is going to
>> > work on fixing bugs that no longer exist with mono 2.10 and later? If no
>> > ones is going to work on doing that then we can't honestly say that mono
>> > 2.6 or 2.8 are still supported.
>> >
>> > If we intend to have new OpenSim users, we should have them using the
>> mono
>> > version with which they'll get the best experience with the existing /
>> > future code base. It doesn't help anyone if they use an outdated version
>> of
>> > mono and find that the problems they encounter aren't going to be
>> addressed
>> > because they no longer exist with newer versions of mono.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> > Ilan Tochner
>> > Co-Founder and CEO
>> > Kitely Ltd.
>> >
>> > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 2:36 PM, Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Nobody is asking you to use an older version. The minimum version is
>> >> simply the earliest version that would be required to run OpenSimulator.
>> >> Anyone is free to use any later version if they so choose.
>> >>
>> >> It's also not true that later versions are necessarily better. I've
>> >> personally had to disable features in OpenSimulator and remove them from
>> >> core due to newer versions of Mono which introduced new bugs that made
>> such
>> >> features unusable.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Ilan Tochner <ilan at kitely.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Mono 2.10 was released Feb 15th, 2011, i.e almost two years ago. I
>> don't
>> >>> think there is any target platform that mono 2.6 runs on that doesn't
>> have
>> >>> mono 2.10 working on it as well.
>> >>>
>> >>> There have been many bug fixes in mono between the 2.6 release and the
>> >>> 2.10 release, some of which can definitely effect OpenSim performance
>> and
>> >>> stability. Who would choose to use the older mono version when a
>> better one
>> >>> has been available for at least two years? If someone reports a problem
>> >>> with OpenSim I think we should require them to at least test it using
>> mono
>> >>> 2.10 so we can rule out the older mono being the cause of the problem.
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> Cheers,
>> >>>
>> >>> Ilan Tochner
>> >>> Co-Founder and CEO
>> >>> Kitely Ltd.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 4:28 AM, Dahlia Trimble <
>> dahliatrimble at gmail.com>wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> I think the point is raise it to the minimum version which supports
>> the
>> >>>> codebase. If there was some feature in 2.10 that did not exist in 2.6
>> and
>> >>>> that feature was required for proper execution, then 2.10 would be a
>> better
>> >>>> target. Otherwise it would just be forcing people to upgrade who
>> would not
>> >>>> otherwise need to.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> There's nothing stopping anyone from upgrading to 2.10 if they desire,
>> >>>> however, requiring a higher version than is really necessary limits
>> >>>> potential users of the software to those who are able to install those
>> >>>> versions in their setups. If a goal of OpenSimulator developers is
>> wide
>> >>>> adoption, then it makes sense to have it be usable on as many existing
>> >>>> hardware/software configurations as possible.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Ilan Tochner <ilan at kitely.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> I second setting 2.10 as the base. If we'll be forcing people to
>> >>>>> upgrade I think we should upgrade to the latest stable release and
>> not to
>> >>>>> one that is outdated.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> If OpenSim works fine with 3.0 then I'd vote for it to be the base.
>> If
>> >>>>> we're still calling OpenSim alpha we should at least get the
>> benefits of
>> >>>>> doing so. Supporting old versions of mono is a waste of developer
>> resources.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Cheers,
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Ilan Tochner
>> >>>>> Co-Founder and CEO
>> >>>>> Kitely Ltd.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:20 PM, Trinity <trinity93 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>> if we can get a way with it why not go to 2.10 else quickly be out
>> of
>> >>>>>> date agian
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 9:38 AM, James Hughes <
>> >>>>>> jamesh at bluewallgroup.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> +1
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On 01/24/2013 10:29 PM, Justin Clark-Casey wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Whilst writing JsonStore regression tests this evening, I hit the
>> >>>>>>>> problem where modInvoke script methods of more than 4 parameters
>> >>>>>>>> cannot
>> >>>>>>>> be registered on Mono 2.4.3 as it doesn't implement the required
>> >>>>>>>> larger
>> >>>>>>>> multi-parameter Func generic types.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Therefore, I want to bump the minimum Mono version for
>> OpenSimulator
>> >>>>>>>> up
>> >>>>>>>> to 2.6 which was released more than 3 years ago. This also
>> involves
>> >>>>>>>> bumping the minimum .net framework version up to 4.0, as also
>> >>>>>>>> detailed
>> >>>>>>>> at [1]
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> [1] http://opensimulator.org/**mantis/view.php?id=5971<
>> http://opensimulator.org/mantis/view.php?id=5971>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Any comments?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> ______________________________**_________________
>> >>>>>>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> >>>>>>> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
>> >>>>>>> https://lists.berlios.de/**mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev<
>> 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
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> 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
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> 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
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > 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
>>
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at lists.berlios.de
> https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev

More information about the Opensim-dev mailing list