Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Kadah
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 I think the general rule is here that if its something like Emerald's multi-attach where it doesn't work or causes artifacts for other viewers, it needs to go through LL, get PO approval and a project for getting effected APIs added or changed, as wel

Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Celierra Darling
(I am not a lawyer, but...) >From the text in the blog post, it looks like it's intended to be an anti-fragmentation measure. I don't think it's literally a desire to make the TPV devs wait until the official viewer catches up (and definitely not to make TPV people "develop [features] for the LL

Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Jessica Lyon
Actually, under 2.k, features like breast physics, secondary attachments, shared parcel WL etc, would have never been permitted to exist. And this means that any feature in the future to which a TPV may conjur up, which effects the shared experience (Ie. something one user could see but another cou

Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Brandon Husbands
Guess its how you interpreted it wheww. On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Cinder Roxley wrote: > Yes, you're mistaken. The key phrase there is "alters the shared > experience of the virtual world". A tpv can alter individual user's > experiences, (UI, build tools, controls, graphics enhancements

Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Cinder Roxley
Yes, you're mistaken. The key phrase there is "alters the shared experience of the virtual world". A tpv can alter individual user's experiences, (UI, build tools, controls, graphics enhancements) but not the shared experience of the world. IE, exposing information such as the friend online v

Re: [opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Brandon Husbands
Holy... That's a huge policy change. On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 5:44 PM, Nalates Urriah wrote: > Does this new policy essentially eliminate the reason for the existence of > 3rd party viewers: > > 2.k : You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience > of the virtual world in any

[opensource-dev] Viewer Policy Changes

2012-02-24 Thread Nalates Urriah
Does this new policy essentially eliminate the reason for the existence of 3rd party viewers: 2.k : You must not provide any feature that alters the shared experience of the virtual world in any way not provided by or accessible to users of the latest released Linden Lab viewer. http://community.