<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
I'm glad this is getting a generally positive reaction. I believe in
the hypergrid, or something like it, strongly enough that I'm going to
stick around and do whatever necessary to see it, or something like it,
go into the box.<br>
<br>
Obviously, I agree with everything said here about revising things
properly and making sure the edges aren't too rough. I will appreciate
one or more of your 'older' ones (he!) looking carefully into it.
Generally, the hypergrid code is cleanly separated from the core code,
but let me tell you what I see as the main ugliness of this
contribution:<br>
<br>
The hypergrid touches heavily on Communications and, lightly, on
Environment.Scenes. Communications isn't as well componentized as other
things are; for example, the IClientAPI is a wonderful piece of the
architecture! Unlike that, the construction code for Communications is
hard-coded in OpenSimBase. Because of that, I had to subclass OpenSim,
which is very ugly. If there's a way of making Communications a
component that can be specified in the config file, that would be
great! Not just for the hypergrid, but it would open the door for
experimentation with other alternative interoperability ideas.<br>
<br>
For the extension on Environment.Scenes, again, the Scene-related
classes are being hard-coded in OpenSimBase. If there's a way of
spec-ing that outside, it would be great.<br>
<br>
I know how to quick-fix both of these, but I think this probably needs
a solid fix from those of you who have been making the wonderful job of
componentizing opensim, rather than a quick fix from me.<br>
<br>
Crista<br>
<br>
Stefan Andersson wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:BLU134-W21506904F377F9A70B6C5DD5120@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<style>
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
</style>As much as I share that sentiment, and despite not having
looked at the patch, it's usually a good idea to consider splitting
large patches up into more of babysteps - 'process' over 'product' so
to speak.<br>
<br>
Ie, is it possible for the hypergrid posse to work with core over time
to gradually change core into something suitable for them?<br>
<br>
Most oftenly to let the code transform in steps leads to the code
itself 'accumulating wisdom' - which leads to greated flexibility and
encapsulation. (If it's done with proper love and care in each step) -
and also lets core + hypergrid communicate over small chunks of code,
instead of big whoppers. (Historically, big whoppers either rot or
create havoc, but undesired outcomes)<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Stefan Andersson<br>
Tribal Media AB<br>
<br>
Join the 3d web revolution : <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://tribalnet.se/">http://tribalnet.se/</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> Date: Tue, 18 Nov 2008 08:08:32 -0500<br>
> From: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sdague@gmail.com">sdague@gmail.com</a><br>
> To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de">opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de</a><br>
> Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Hypergrid patch<br>
> <br>
> Justin Clark-Casey wrote:<br>
> > Dahlia Trimble wrote:<br>
> >> Thanks, that one built properly against 7364, but 7376
(head at the time <br>
> >> I tried) complained about some missing references to
LLSD. Seems a patch <br>
> >> set of this size can go stale quite quickly so hopefully
a few of the <br>
> >> other core devs can chime in real soon and give it a
nod... and then we <br>
> >> can work together to commit it. :)<br>
> > <br>
> > I think this situation was somewhat unusual with the libOMV
update - the names of fairly fundamental classes do not <br>
> > change every day.<br>
> > <br>
> > I think with a large patch the submitter has to accept a
certain amount of pain in resyncing it to the current trunk - <br>
> > this in itself demonstrates how serious they (and we) are
about supporting it. There is a need, I feel, to consider <br>
> > this carefully and not rush in to a decision. This patch
requires evaluation on both a raw technical and an <br>
> > architectural level - an evaluation that I hope to start
helping with later on today.<br>
> <br>
> I'm +1 for the idea, I'll defer to Justin's judgement on
implementation<br>
> here because I won't have enough time to dig through this of late.<br>
> <br>
> I definitely think getting hypergrid, or something like it, into
core is<br>
> a good thing. Letting opensim grids interconnect out of the box is<br>
> something that has always been on our vision list.<br>
> <br>
> -Sean<br>
> <br>
> -- <br>
> Sean Dague / Neas Bade<br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:sdague@gmail.com">sdague@gmail.com</a><br>
> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://dague.net">http://dague.net</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
<br>
<pre wrap="">
<hr size="4" width="90%">
_______________________________________________
Opensim-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de">Opensim-dev@lists.berlios.de</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev">https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>