<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1>
<STYLE type=text/css><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16608" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=MailContainerBody
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 10px; PADDING-LEFT: 10px; PADDING-TOP: 15px"
bgColor=#ffffff leftMargin=0 topMargin=0 CanvasTabStop="true"
name="Compose message area">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT size=3>> Database </FONT></DIV>
<UL>
<LI>NHibernate (if possible. This unifies a lot of the data paths and there is
some sample NHibernate code on the list) </LI></UL>
<DIV>Definitely YES. Would it be possible to try unify the persistence process
anyway in the case NHibernate would not fit ? By using the lbsa's table mapper
pattern for example ?</DIV>
<DIV>The more we had to persist stuff, the more difficult it get because of code
duplication.</DIV></FONT>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt Tahoma">
<DIV><FONT face=Arial></FONT><FONT face=Arial></FONT><FONT
face=Arial></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A
title="mailto:cfk@pacbell.net
CTRL + Cliquez ici pour suivre le lien"
href="mailto:cfk@pacbell.net">Charles Krinke</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Friday, March 21, 2008 4:49 PM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de
href="mailto:opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de">opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Opensim-dev] Mixed License (module)
svn</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif">As we head
towards an OpenSim 0.6 release, hopefully in about 6-8 weeks from where we are
now, which is 0.5.4, it seems to me that we have a chance to make a couple of
minor snapshot releases and then 0.6.<BR><BR>Recent thoughts indicate that the
following releases on roughly two week intervals might be appropriate. That is,
0.5.6, 0.5.8 and then 0.6. <BR><BR><SPAN>Our 0.6 Roadmap (proposed) at <A
title="http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Roadmap
CTRL + Cliquez ici pour suivre le lien"
href="http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Roadmap"
target=_blank>http://opensimulator.org/wiki/Roadmap</A> has:</SPAN><BR><BR>
<H2><SPAN class=mw-headline>0.6 Proposed </SPAN></H2>
<UL>
<LI>Database
<UL>
<LI>NHibernate (if possible. This unifies a lot of the data paths and there
is some sample NHibernate code on the list)
<LI>Persistance for AV Appear across Sim Reboots (partial implementation by
MW already) </LI></UL></LI></UL>
<UL>
<LI>Scripting
<UL>
<LI>Complete LSL functions (~ 30% now)
<LI>Script engine base improvements </LI></UL></LI></UL>
<UL>
<LI>Grid Mode
<UL>
<LI>OGS2 REST protocol (we've been kicking this around for a while, perhaps
0.6 is the right time for it?) </LI></UL></LI></UL>
<UL>
<LI>Physics
<UL>
<LI>Hollow and Cut Prims support (need to write for 20 prim types)
</LI></UL></LI></UL>
<UL>
<LI>Canned Assets
<UL>
<LI>Clothes
<LI>Bodies
<LI>Prim Objects
<LI>Animations
<LI>Textures </LI></UL></LI></UL>
<UL>
<LI>Profile
<UL>
<LI>Would like to write a Profile Module interface that lets you backend the
profile pane to various different directory services (sdague)
</LI></UL></LI></UL>So, I guess the questions for the group are:<BR><BR>1. Does
this represent out perception of where we wish to be for the 0.6 release?<BR>2.
Are two minor snapshot releases of 0.5.6 & 0.5.8 followed by 0.6
reasonable?<BR>3. Is merely increasing the time between the snapshots (if
desired by core) sufficient for us to get to 0.6 without undue
angst?<BR><BR>Yours Truly, Don Quixote<BR>Trusty Steed, Trusty Lance, Pesky
Windmills.<BR><BR><BR></DIV></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>_______________________________________________<BR>Opensim-dev mailing
list<BR>Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de<BR>https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev<BR></BODY></HTML>