[Opensim-dev] The Future of Open Simulator(?) (UNCLASSIFIED)

Thu Aug 13 15:37:20 UTC 2015

I'd love to see a "Convention over Configuration" approach. What I mean is
that OpenSim come configured for best practices.

On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 10:13 AM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US) <
douglas.maxwell3.civ at mail.mil> wrote:

> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
> Can someone explain to me why the core developers insist on control of the
> code, but refuse to manage the project?  I ask again:  what are your plans
> for
> the future of Open Simulator?  It's ok to say you don't have any, let's
> make
> some!
>
> I'll throw out some ideas based on the MOSES goals and objectives:
>
> 1)  Scale limitations lifted.  We need a system that is governed by its
> available hardware and network resources, not bound by software limits.
>
> 2)  Let's create clear definitions of "stability".
>
> 3)  Clear and up-to-date API documentation.
>
> 4)  Clear and up-to-date OS deployment guidance under numerous typical
> network
> topologies.
>
> 5)  Bug identification & reduction.
>
> 6)  Efficient ray tracing.  Useful for simulation of sensors as well as
> naturalized bot interactions.
>
> 7)  N-body physics.  Would be nice to have vehicles that can follow terrain
> and not look like Star Wars land speeders.  Would also be nice to have more
> natural avatar movement rather than the rigid animations we use now.
>
> What are yours?  Anyone?
>
> v/r -doug
>
> Dr. Douglas Maxwell
> Science and Technology Manager
> Virtual World Strategic Applications
> U.S. Army Research Lab
> Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
> (c) (407) 242-0209
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: opensim-dev-bounces at opensimulator.org
> [mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at opensimulator.org] On Behalf Of Justin
> Clark-Casey
> Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2015 7:40 AM
> To: opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] The Future of Open Simulator(?) (UNCLASSIFIED)
>
> I won't comment much over future direction.  However, Overte was never a
> governing entity, it was set up only to manage CLAs and maybe some other
> things in the future (which never got realized).  Power over development
> direction has always been with the developers.
>
> CLAs for open-source projects tend to come from corporations running those
> projects that are very worried about getting sued.  The vast majority have
> no
> such structures.  It is very debatable whether anything other than the
> open-source license is needed.
>
>
> And there are many different project structures out there.  Linux, for
> example, is controlled by a single individual who, along with a group of
> authorized lieutenants, controls everything that goes into the codebase.
> That
> is an evolution since Linus used to be the sole committer (and got
> overwhelmed
> by it).
>
> The direction of evolution is not inevitably to some managing organization.
> Or at the very least, the developers much always be in charge of what
> happens
> to the codebase.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:59 PM, Maxwell, Douglas CIV USARMY ARL (US)
> <douglas.maxwell3.civ at mail.mil> wrote:
>
>
>         Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>         Caveats: NONE
>
>         Projects evolve.
>
>         I couldn't begin to estimate the amount of work that has gone into
> this
>         valuable project.  The potential for technical and economic
> success is
>         profound and I see a bright future for the Open Simulator.  That
> said, I fear
>         we are at a crossroads at this time with this project.
>
>         It is unclear at this time what the maintainers of the Open
> Simulator code
>         have planned for the project.  Is there a roadmap or some sort of
>         goals/objectives you are working against?  What development
> targets would you
>         like to see met in 12, 16, and 24 months from now?
>
>         The MOSES project has needs & requirements that we are stepping up
> and
>         supporting with internal development, but we aren't the drivers
> for the Open
>         Simulator project.  We've done our own internal gap analysis and
> determined
>         where in the OS code there should be investment in stability,
> monitoring, and
>         scalability improvements.  In short, we are returning our code to
> you to
>         adhere and abide by applicable derivative source code licensing
> terms.
>
>         I believe the removal of the Overte as a formal governing entity
> is a mistake
>         if you plan to encourage participation from business and
> government.  The CLA
>         was viewed by my organization as a formalized relationship
> acknowledging the
>         legal responsibility of open source code stewardship and use.
>
>         If this were simply a hobby, then Overte and the CLA would not be
> needed.
>         However, the Open Simulator is being used by businesses charging
> money for
>         service, by researchers studying human behavior and technical
> behavior, by
>         educators, and more.  Like it or not, you have created a product
> that needs
>         management and attention at a higher level than the ad-hoc method
> that is
>         currently your standard operating procedures.
>
>         Project management must evolve.
>
>         As projects are started at the grass roots and then emerge as
> valued
>         commodities, the need for different styles of management is
> required.  A
>         project with two active developers is different than a project
> with 20 or
> 200.
>         If the management does not evolve, then the project will be
> limited and
> growth
>         is not possible.  I encourage you to think about a new structure
> that can
>         handle influx of large amounts of donated code in a short time.
> The kinds of
>         investments needed to make this a world class simulator requires
> you to step
>         up and begin project planning.
>
>         This is a community effort.
>
>         If the community values this work and would like to see it grow or
> even
>         receive maintenance, then the community must voice.  This code
> does not
> belong
>         in the hands of a gov't agency or corporate entity.  This code
> belongs in the
>         hands of a strong non-profit that can handle grant and contract
> funds to pay
> a
>         staff of maintainers, code reviewers, testers, and functional area
> code
>         managers.  This could be an Overte spin-off, or even an academic
> institution
>         of some kind.
>
>         I've given you a glimpse into what the next 9 months of
> development for the
>         MOSES related Open Simulator issues.  We came in this spring at a
> time when
>         development seemed to be winding down and things were quiet after
> the 0.8.x
>         releases.  What will you do when we reach the logical conclusion
> of our work?
>         What is next for Open Simulator?
>
>         I look forward to your feedback and constructive discourse.
>
>         v/r -doug
>
>         Dr. Douglas Maxwell
>         Science and Technology Manager
>         Virtual World Strategic Applications
>         U.S. Army Research Lab
>         Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
>         (c) (407) 242-0209
>
>
>
>         Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
>         Caveats: NONE
>
>
>
>         _______________________________________________
>         Opensim-dev mailing list
>         Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>         http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
>
>
>
> Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
> Caveats: NONE
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Opensim-dev mailing list
> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20150813/40c5860c/attachment-0001.html>