[Opensim-dev] Firestorm OpenSimulator support policy changes

[Cinder Roxley]

There are viewer developers. Several of them. I myself maintain two OpenSim
compatible viewers, Alchemy and Radegast. Lirusatio doesn’t show any signs
of abandoning Singularity’s support. The sky hasn’t fallen.  To be frank,
Firestorm is a massive codebase with a very unorthodox and hard to test
development cycle. It is frustrating to work on. I should know, I spent the
better part of five years bringing Firestorm up to snuff OpenSim-wise, but
I do not work on that project anymore. For ease of migration the from
proprietary world to the opensource metaverse, I hope Firestorm is able to
get past this and remain compatible, but if it doesn’t, there are several
alternatives.


On September 21, 2019 at 7:41:54 AM, drWhiet (drwhiet at spacefriends.de)
wrote:

Ok, so I understood that if there is no viewer dev out there that takes the
job of creating a new viewer we are „stucked“ with the currently working
viewers - which I am fine with as there is no new stuff in openSim? Did you
Opensim Devs have a plan B than?

Best regards,
Wordfromthe Wise

> Am 20.09.2019 um 17:31 schrieb Cinder Roxley <cinder at alchemyviewer.org>:
>
> Now I understand the concern better. Thank you. I do remember with the
> release of Viewer 2 from Linden Lab, that OpenSim regions were being
> hammered pretty heavily with unsupported MOAP requests among other issues,
> and many grids blocked Viewer 2 derivatives because they were causing
> instability, so it makes sense.
>
> It’s been a while since Alchemy has had a new release, but there should be
> another one soon. Might be well worth it for Firestorm to rebase their
> current OpenSim support on Alchemy’s if they are unable to tow the line on
> their own. Just a thought.
>
>
> On September 20, 2019 at 10:14:03 AM, Leal Duarte (ajlduarte at sapo.pt)
wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Yes but core team viewer project is a long run one, will not happen
> any time soon, if ever.
>
> Today we only have viewers, like yours, singularity, firestorm,
> etc, etc.
>
> OpenSim never had full SL protocol or features, (to be more correct
> it has at most, part of what viewer usually known as TVPs have), and
> never will.
>
> To make things short, the "big deal" here is just the impact that
> "AS IS" official statement may have on currently running opensim code,
> in fact even future code.
>
> Firestorm team or any other team, have the right to decide they own
> terms, we have the right to prevent potentially having regions crashing
> all over the place.
>
> As i said, i hope this is just a temporary glitch in the matrix, if
> i may say so
>
> Regards,
>
> Ubit.
>
>
>
>
>> On 20-Sep-19 15:40, Cinder Roxley wrote:
>> It was made clear at last OSCC (and for several years prior) that Second
>> Life viewer compatibility was not a goal, and that core team would be
>> developing its own viewer as a baseline to deviate from the Second Life
>> protocol, which it hasn’t really been compliant with since 2010, so
what’s
>> the big deal?
>>
>>
>>> On September 20, 2019 at 9:22:51 AM, Leal Duarte (ajlduarte at sapo.pt)
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We have been informed that Firestorm team changed again their
>> policy about OpenSimulator support.
>>
>> Reading their statements we can only understand that they changed
>> from having a forgotten, basically dead fork, to just provide a AS IS
>> viewer.
>>
>> They also inform us that AS IS will mean addiction of code just
>> copied from Linden Labs viewer and removal of other code may include
>> what they call old protocols.
>>
>> Firestorm team has the right to do whatever they decide, no
>> question about that.
>>
>> Such "AS IS" Firestorm viewer, in the terms currently defined by
>> them, CAN NOT be accepted as viewer for OpenSimulator/Opensim.
>>
>> We all hope this is just some misunderstanding/disorientation
>> facing the real technical difficulties.
>>
>> But since we can't predict when or what a new release "for opensim,
>> almost for opensim, or whatever" will be, and knowing that just new BoM
>> code may cause issues on all version but current dev master...
>>
>> I must recommended all to NOT UPGRADE TO SUCH VERSIONS, and inform
>> all your users to no do so, until this situation is clarified.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Ubit, (Leal Duarte)
>>
>> ps: do not think i did not tried to talk with them, for example about
>> BoM potential issues and possible fixes, wasted hours just being
>> ignored.. but details..
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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