[Opensim-dev] Harvesting code from forks of Opensim

Fly Man fly.man.opensim at gmail.com
Wed May 27 18:41:40 UTC 2015


Well, feel free to share that incomplete list with us so people know which
functions you're looking at.

And yes, AuroraSim's LSL_Api.cs list is a lot shorter then the one in
WhiteCore because of the recent changes we made to LSL functions.

That's why I am kinda amazed that you found "old" LSL functions that aren't
in OpenSim yet or not implemented.

2015-05-27 17:53 GMT+02:00 W Smith <wanderingcodesmith at yahoo.co.uk>:

> Fly Man
>
> I only have a probably incomplete list of LSL functions (25 at them
> moment) that are missing from OpenSim. I have no idea how many have been
> implemented in Aurora. The only one I looked at in Aurora so far were the
> LL json functions, the first on my list.
>
> You appear to be wrong about needing AA* functions, the code for the LL
> Json functions that I got from aurora sim was not from and contained no
> references to any AA* functions. You may have an older version or perhaps a
> more recent from WhiteCore I have not looked there, I only found out
> WhiteCore existed yesterday.
> I got a copy from https://github.com/aurora-sim/Aurora-Sim a week or so
> ago.
> See
> https://github.com/aurora-sim/Aurora-Sim/blob/master/Aurora/AuroraDotNetEngine/APIs/LSL_Api.cs
> for their implentation.
>
> The code from Aurora sim compiled in OpenSim merely by adding "using
> OpenMetaverse.StructuredData;". No other libraries were added by me, I am
> just using the OSD library supplied from the OpensSim git repository.
>
> The Aurora implementation is plain wrong, its results differ from those of
> SL LSL, it requires a number of changes to correct the outputs. Also
> changes to cope with OpenSim allowing native c# data types to be added to
> an lsl_list, lots of defensive type checking required to avoid casting
> errors.
>
> My original intention was to work down my list of functions and submit
> either a patch with an implementation or failing that a patch with the
> "plumbing" and a "not implemented" implementation in LSL_Api
>
> Regards Talun
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Wed, 27/5/15, Fly Man <fly.man.opensim at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Harvesting code from forks of Opensim
>  To: opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
>  Date: Wednesday, 27 May, 2015, 12:53
>
>  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
>
>
>
>
>  -----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
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20150527/0099fb74/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Opensim-dev mailing list