[Opensim-dev] Still on Sim and Phys Frames per Second (FPS)

[dz]

I am  astounded  at  how much of the dialogue about this issue   you both
 choose to ignore.

Please  publish the location of the ROADMAP of REAL CORE problems.... I
will be  happy  to attend the  MOSES meetings  and attempt to get those
 issues on their agenda.  Don't  blame people for working on the things
that are important to them when that is the example set by core over a long
period.   You expect people to help and  then denegrate them  for not
attacking the problems  you REFUSE to document and share in public.

When  did  MOSES  get access to commit the patch???    The patch was
accepted   after a significant amount of  conversation...    Everyone BUT
you and Melanie  voted it  +1...  you can't rewrite the history and assert
that the problem is because  MOSES committed a patch...  CORE committed the
patch at the request of this community.

I have repeatedly asked for the identification of these mysterious  users
 who are the source of this avalanche of complaints...   I apologize for
assuming they resided on Melanies  grid...
Now  that I hear   that  her users  aren't the source of the complaints
I'm left to wonder if there is ANY justification for  reverting the
stats..  PLEASE share with the group what the source of these complaints is
  so we can begin a dialogue.  I participate in a LOT of OpenSim related
forums   just for that purpose...   I haven't  seen  any of the  noise
 that is  supposedly deafening.

Assuming "they"  truly are  upset, I haven't herd a peep  about  why it is
appropriate  for some backroom decision  to override the consensus built in
this forum over a period of months.
I'm sorry,  I've tried  repeatedly to figure out  WHY it is important to
revert, and all I keep hearing  is  "Melanie  didnt know it  would affect a
lag meter"..   This  argument  was extended to include  " We have to
accommodate users of viewers  that are NO LONGER being  maintained"...
 HOW in the world  can that be a viable position for you to defend Neb,
 when your rant  was directed at the importance of moving forward with
viewer developers  or we are dead...??

I really  am trying  to figure this out,  but  all I see as responses   is
  "You are  wrong,  I changed my mind,  it is  import to  someone  who
 still hasn't  spoken on this list"   The  whole point of this list is to
share the issues that are important.... Given the volume of traffic on the
subject,  it obviously is.    Please  share  some  REAL information about
the actual impact  so we can re-evaluate the  needs of the WHOLE community.
     We  don't  know  WHO is  complaining,,  We  HAVE heard that you can
turn the blinking lights into numeric representations ( even in the OLD
meters),   We HAVE heard  that there is a JIRA for the  viewer team to
remove/update the functioning of the lag meter..     Everyone agrees  that
the lag meter  cant possibly be correct   so I find it impossible to
believe that it is  INTEGRAL to the success of  Opensim.    All of use  who
wanted accurate stats  could be  wrong,   but I'd  sure like to know  WHY,
 not just have someone  pronounce  we are  and  implement yet another
obscure  INI variable..


On Tue, Nov 10, 2015 at 2:56 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni <
nebadon2025 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Doug I participated in MOSES grid as well and my experience there was
> terrible, far worse performance than i experienced in any other grid, I
> took part in the FCVW build and planning and experienced a multitude of
> problems on MOSES platform that just do not exist in the core opensimulator
> software.  And this is what I mean by chasing ghosts, MOSES is fixing bugs
> in MOSES for MOSES that just do not exist in the core software.  You can
> feel however you want and if you feel embarrassed then go work on MOSES
> software, no one is stopping you.  I do agree though that this whole thing
> is quite a huge embarrassment for the project.  It still does not change
> the fact that to date no improvements have come from this change and all
> its done is cause arguments, the reason their code was not accepted is
> because it was not suitable for core, end of story.  They wanted us to
> accept patches unconditionally and sorry, that is not going to happen.
>
> --
> Michael Emory Cerquoni
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20151110/bd7ccf71/attachment-0001.html>