Tofu and Aimee,
I haven't been as closed to the Snowstorm efforts as others, but I've
observed the results of your focus and hard work.
Best of luck in wherever you end up working.
Best,
- JB
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 2:33 PM, Kent Quirk (Q Linden)
wrote:
> Hello, everyone.
>
> We've had a good
If it were renamed and some of it's "heritage" obscured, I could use it in
some business situations where it would be nice to have the functionality.
As it... can't go anywhere near RLV.
Regards,
- JB
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 3:51 PM, Ponzu wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 1:27 PM, Lance Corrima
I was just sketching this up yesterday, in a brainstorming session with some
folks about how
we thought the v.w. systems would be morphing over the next 2-5 years.
A co-operative P2P network of users who would be willing to opt into
"participate in cache sharing"
would be a good idea. Having the
> This viewer would get blacklisted before it ever got out the door.
Because... it would be non-compliant in some way?
On Thu, Sep 16, 2010 at 7:36 PM, Dale Mahalko wrote:
> I just don't have the motivation for it myself, but I would really
> like it if a 3rd party developer would gut out LL's
Hi Ann,
You suggested: * "What I think LL should consider is something in the TPV
policy that prohibits any tpv from connecting to any non LL server for any
reason when a LL grid is selected for login."*
I'd change that to require that any TPV *disclose* the specifics of any and
all non-LL server
Joe,
Thanks for doing this. There are obviously a LOT of concerns. I'm not sure
if Linden Lab is willing to do so, but sharing any additional insights about
why certain parts of the TPVP were drafted the way they are, might help.
My ask, of the community: This has the potential to be a meeting w
Thanks, Merov.
Using Dzonatas' SNOW-375 will be a great way to extend the viewer
capabilities.
Progress on SNOW-495 is good news - thank you! Is that against the 1.4
codebase, or Snow V2?
Thanks,
- JB
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:56 AM, Philippe (Merov) Bossut <
me...@lindenlab.com> wrote:
> Hi,
ch again
> (and
> can still log in). Since the TOS/TPVp isn't effective as of 30 April, this
> is
> not an illegal thing to do. If I do not get another pop-up at 30 April (and
> I
> predict I won't), then I will still not have agreed to the TPV policy.
>
> Neve
Here are my thoughts:
1) If you're not an attorney, please do the rest of us a favor by not acting
like one.
The TPVP is a legal document, and while we all have opinions, opinions
that are based on something other than legal understanding and
experience
are more likely to contribute to
Howard,
Can you amplify on this? "We are going to start moving more of our Viewer
development into the open."
Which parts of the viewer, specifically?
Here's why I'm asking:
I'm concerned that there are so many divergent viewer projects, that the
end-user experience is going to be fractured.
Wh
Of course we have no sense.
We are SL scripters.
We have had our "rational assumptions" pummeled out of us ;)
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 3:45 PM, Glen Canaday wrote:
> The scripter's list has no sense of humor, either.
>
> On 03/10/2010 09:54 AM, Lance Corrimal wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch, 10. März 2010
About that: "Creator out of SL; no source code"
But we know the "source" is still bound to the prims, a la SL.
Has LL ever done anything about helping recover abandoned code, in some way?
- JB
On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Garmin Kawaguichi <
garmin.kawagui...@magalaxie.com> wrote:
> I supp
Typo, "schmypo"... thanks for posting it! :)
- JB
On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 8:13 AM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) <
mag...@matrisync.com> wrote:
> Nice. But...erm..."Snowgobe Documentation 2.0"? :-)
>
> On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 2:02 AM, Brandon Husbands wrote:
> > http://dimentox.com/sg2dox/
13 matches
Mail list logo
