[Opensim-dev] Harvesting code from forks of Opensim
Fly Man
fly.man.opensim at gmail.com
Wed May 27 11:53:43 UTC 2015
Talun,
Let me quote 2 pieces out of your reply:
"First of all I have no interest in extracting anything from the AA*
functions or any other part of Aurora-Sim that is not required by LSL
functions."
If you are able to compile a list of the functions that are missing /
lacking in OpenSim and that work in AuroraSim, that would be a great help.
But as I mentioned before, some of the functions you see as LSL functions
are bound in with the implementations for aaFunctions.
As an example, the llJson function you mentioned ties in with the aa
function for it, using a different approach to JSON as the LibOMV wasn't
upgraded back then. The latest LibOMV has the JSON implementation much
easier and better then the one in AuroraSim.
"A few parts of the Aurora sim function are usable (general looping
structure) as is but most require changes to correct the differences with
SLs version."
"None will probably be a direct fit to OpenSim but there will be some
degree of copy/paste"
My personal conclusion: Talun is gonna create a list of the LSL functions
that are in AuroraSim which don't exist in OpenSim or are not implemented
correctly and he's gonna donate his time to rewrite them all so they can be
send in as a patch for OpenSim.
That sounds like a good starting point to me
2015-05-27 3:44 GMT+02:00 Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com>:
> There is a OSD library which is part of libopenmetaverse. That
> implementation is compatible with the OpenSimulator license and the JSON
> implementation in it is fairly robust and used extensively in
> OpenSimulator. "ll*" functions are usually documented on
> http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/LSL_Portal and that site is generally
> regarded as the canonical reference.
>
> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 6:33 PM, W Smith <wanderingcodesmith at yahoo.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> I have no idea how the idea of importing these AA* functions got into
>> this thread my interest is in implementing LSL.
>>
>> I was intending implementing some of the 24+ unimplemented LSL ll*
>> functions that OpenSim lacks. I was going to look for "inspiration and
>> assistance" in doing this in the Aurora sim implementations.
>>
>> None will probably be a direct fit to OpenSim but there will be some
>> degree of copy/paste
>>
>> Talun
>>
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Wed, 27/5/15, Morgaine <morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Harvesting code from forks of Opensim
>> To: opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>> Cc: "Morgaine Dinova" <morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com>
>> Date: Wednesday, 27 May, 2015, 1:28
>>
>> Fly Man writes:
>> > and my
>> -1 was meant to say "Please do not put things that no
>> one knows about in OpenSim"
>>
>> +1 for that
>> -1. :-)
>>
>> Your point applies to all FOSS code of
>> course, not just Opensim. Undocumented or minimally
>> documented code is a liability, not an asset, even if
>> it's a million lines of alleged
>> "awesomeness".
>>
>> The D/C ratio is not a perfect metric,
>> but when it's near zero then you know that there's a
>> problem.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, May 27, 2015 at
>> 1:18 AM, Fly Man <fly.man.opensim at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Let me answer most
>> questions that have been shooting up in my personal mailbox
>> which have to do with Opensim as a project.
>>
>> I'll start with
>> perhaps the most easy part of the discussion: AuroraSim.
>>
>> AuroraSim is a derivated
>> from OpenSim, forked on the 14th of October 2010 after Rev
>> (RevolutionSmythe) decided that Opensim wasn't going
>> into the way he personally had seen. He decided to fork the
>> Opensim tree and renamed it to AuroraSim. In the years
>> following he upgraded parts of the source-code and added a
>> set of new functional code parts knows as the
>> aaFunctions.
>>
>> These
>> functions are based on the code that he wrote at that moment
>> for the AuroraSim branch. Remember, this is an OLDER copy of
>> what the current Opensim branch is now. Most of the
>> functions in there won't ever work in Opensim mainly
>> because Opensim does not have these older hooks.
>>
>> In 2013 Rev was done
>> with his education and decided to start working which
>> brought AuroraSim to a slower moving branch and patches
>> weren't applied instantly anymore. The last patch that
>> was applied to the sourcecode was Jan 2014 and the project
>> slowly died.
>>
>> So,
>> currently there's no maintainer of any of the code that
>> was/is in AuroraSim other then what is currently in that
>> GitHub repository.
>>
>> Now here comes the part which Kevin
>> already mentioned: "The fork is called
>> WhiteCore"
>>
>> Indeed, WhiteCore is a fork of
>> AuroraSim after I personally saw what was happening to
>> AuroraSim. I had been watching the slow pace for a longer
>> period of time and already had found 2 other people that had
>> the same "issue". So in December 2013 AuroraSim
>> was forked and re-based as WhiteCoreSim.
>>
>> Currently in development with 2
>> other developers, I am 1 of the 3 lead developers that
>> actively maintain that "fork" although it's
>> not even close to what the endgoal for it will be.
>>
>> 1 thing that we
>> broke "on purpose" when we changed the name is the
>> aaFunctions because only Rev knows exactly how they are
>> meant to work. At the moment there's no other person who
>> knows what exactly the functions are meant to do other then
>> a better way to have NPC's spawn and some basic
>> functions that mimic the osFunctions.
>>
>> Conclusion: There's no developer
>> at the moment that can look into Rev's head from a
>> distance and ask him how the functions are meant to work (if
>> they still work at all) and my -1 was meant to say
>> "Please do not put things that no one knows about in
>> OpenSim"
>>
>>
>>
>> 2015-05-27 1:58 GMT+02:00
>> Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com>:
>> Just to clarify on
>> the slight chance it was missed, I wasn't suggesting
>> anyone "fork off" in any sense of the term. Many
>> forks, both public and private, already exist and I suspect
>> more will come about. My hope is that the community will
>> survuve and even thrive beyond any code fork.
>>
>> On Tue,
>> May 26, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Morgaine <morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Dahlia writes:
>> >
>> I'd like to see disagreement and forks as a means to
>> drive innovation rather than conflict.
>>
>> More often than not,
>> real project forking into separate projects (not just
>> forking in the github sense) implies an inability or lack of
>> desire to find a meeting of minds with technical peers.
>>
>> If requirements are
>> dramatically different then project forking can be a very
>> reasonable way forward, and to the benefit of everybody.
>> But if the requirements are really quite similar then
>> forking is more likely an indication of inflexibility and
>> intransigence by one or both parties. The communal
>> engineering process has probably failed.
>>
>> This is a
>> technical project, so it's inherently different to
>> discussing the merits of cat pictures -- discussions can be
>> objective. A rationally presented suggestion or even a
>> strong criticism presented in good faith is not a reason for
>> telling people to fork off. If that is the response then
>> it's a sign of extreme project ill health.
>>
>> Negative feedback
>> is intrinsic to good engineering, and all good engineers
>> embrace it. That's not theoretical. Without it a
>> project's direction would never change to take into
>> consideration the bitter lessons of experience.
>>
>> Morgaine.
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at
>> 11:35 PM, Dahlia Trimble <dahliatrimble at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Apparently there is still a fair bit of passion
>> about this platform and I prefer to see this in a manner
>> where people can use the code in a way they see fit and to
>> (hopefully) contribute back something or pay it forward in
>> other ways as appropriate. I'm not opposed to forks but
>> I'd hope civil discourse can be maintained even through
>> the times when much disagreement looms. I would hope that
>> various forks and branches could benefit from each other and
>> the community as a whole can thereby benefit. I'd like
>> to see disagreement and forks as a means to drive innovation
>> rather than conflict.
>>
>> On Tue, May 26, 2015 at
>> 2:14 PM, Morgaine <morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>> Good data, thanks Cinder. It doesn't
>> look like death to me.
>>
>> You clearly have some elite query-foo
>> skills, can you generate a historical list of commits per
>> month and per year? This is a very strong way of debunking
>> allegations of death! :P
>>
>>
>> On Tue, May 26,
>> 2015 at 10:05 PM, Cinder Roxley <cinder at alchemyviewer.org>
>> wrote:
>> On May 26, 2015 at 2:59:54
>> PM, Morgaine (morgaine.dinova at googlemail.com)
>> wrote: I'm just an observer
>> on this project, albeit a very long term one, dating back to
>> near the beginning. One thing that long-term observers are
>> well qualified to do is to confirm or to deny the veracity
>> of allegations of long-term trends.
>>
>> Mike Chase's allegation that
>>
>> "OpenSim is slowly dieing
>> (IMO) from neglect"
>>
>> is clearly unfounded since commits show
>> no sign of stopping. I haven't checked the rate of
>> commits so perhaps Mike has more information in this
>> regard. I welcome better
>> information.https://www.openhub.net/p/opensimulator/commits/summary--
>> Cinder
>> Roxley
>> Sent
>> with Airmail
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>>
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>>
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Opensim-dev mailing list
>> Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150527/265fe7f6/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Opensim-dev
mailing list