[Opensim-dev] Raise minimum mono version to 2.6

M.E. Verhagen marceled9 at gmail.com
Mon Jan 28 09:07:47 UTC 2013 

Is it possible te test what the impact on the performance of opensim is
when it uses mono 2.10 or even mono 3.0 instead of mono 2.6 ?

For most linux systems it is no longer an issue to upgrade mono. In the
past it was, but time changes.

I think opensim should go for performance and not the lowest possible
version.



2013/1/27 Ilan Tochner <ilan at kitely.com>

> We use Linux too and have downloaded and used versions of mono that were
> not officially supported by the distro/version we used. There are
> alternative repositories people can use that are just a Google search away.
>
> IMO, supporting outdated mono versions is a luxury we can't afford in our
> volunteer-based project where the few developers that contribute code are
> focused on modern mono versions.
>
> We won't be spending resources on supporting old mono versions but I
> assume from your reply that you will be. As you are one of the people who
> help move OpenSim forward, this use of your time will negatively effect
> most OpenSim users as your time could have been much better spent improving
> OpenSim for modern versions of mono (I'm being liberal calling the 2 year
> old mono 2.10 release modern).
>
> Your time, your decision but your choice to spend it on outdated
> middleware will negatively effect OpenSim's progress. It really is your
> call, I've said my say about the subject.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Ilan Tochner
> Co-Founder and CEO
> Kitely Ltd.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 11:26 PM, Melanie <melanie at t-data.com> wrote:
>
>> 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
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>



-- 
Groningen en Hannover Opensims:   secondlife://meverhagen.nl:8002:Hannover
ZW/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20130128/9927dafd/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Opensim-dev mailing list