Re: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit?

2010-04-14 Thread Lear Cale
ough -- that's their issue. On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Lear Cale wrote: > FYI, Whoever wrote this is ignorant of US copyright and trademark law. >  In the US (and most countries), you have an implicit copyright > whenver you render an original work in any fixed medium.  I.e., if

Re: [opensource-dev] impending lawsuit?

2010-04-14 Thread Lear Cale
FYI, Whoever wrote this is ignorant of US copyright and trademark law. In the US (and most countries), you have an implicit copyright whenver you render an original work in any fixed medium. I.e., if you sing a song you made up, no implicit copyright, but if you record it or write it down, you do

Re: [opensource-dev] Soft body physics

2010-04-07 Thread Lear Cale
I agree with Jacek -- at least for 1st cut, make it so that flexi hair doesn't pierce anyone's body, but no effect on collisions. This would keep it simple and fix the biggest issue for most people. On Wed, Apr 7, 2010 at 7:39 PM, Jacek Antonelli wrote: > Personally, I would keep soft body effe

Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone?

2010-04-01 Thread Lear Cale
Oops, never mind -- yes it did. My mistake. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 12:33 PM, Lear Cale wrote: > The previous patent clause did not do what you claim it did. > > On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Jonathan Bishop < > bish...@bishopphillips.com> wrote: > >>>

Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone?

2010-04-01 Thread Lear Cale
The previous patent clause did not do what you claim it did. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Jonathan Bishop wrote: > > Simon Disk: > > > Could be wrong but I read the new ToS as lumping patent rights under > Intellectual Property Rights and then compelling the user to grant a license > under

Re: [opensource-dev] New TOS - Compulsory patent licensing gone?

2010-04-01 Thread Lear Cale
This was never prohibited by the old patent clause, which applied only to the patent holder's content. On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 2:05 AM, Jonathan Bishop wrote: >> The new TOS does not include a section on compulsory patent licensing. >> I hope that this omission was unintended and will be rectifi

Re: [opensource-dev] Request for comments about llSetAgentEnvironment / SVC-5520

2010-03-12 Thread Lear Cale
r 12, 2010 at 10:33 AM, Lear Cale wrote: > I think we're arguing over something that's a side effect of an > implementation decision, not a fundamental issue of personal liberty. > Windlight happens to be client side rather than server-side, even > though it's more about

Re: [opensource-dev] Request for comments about llSetAgentEnvironment / SVC-5520

2010-03-12 Thread Lear Cale
I think we're arguing over something that's a side effect of an implementation decision, not a fundamental issue of personal liberty. Windlight happens to be client side rather than server-side, even though it's more about the environment -- the created world -- than it is about personal control of

Re: [opensource-dev] Request for comments about llSetAgentEnvironment / SVC-5520

2010-03-12 Thread Lear Cale
I agree. WL settings are about the appearance of the environment, not the GUI per se. And Carlo has a great suggestion that WL settings should be supported as inventory items, similar to LMs. (Going to make a JIRA for that, Carlo?) On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 8:27 AM, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Wed, Ma

Re: [opensource-dev] [server-beta] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-11 Thread Lear Cale
thy performance penalty, even when no paging is required. Lear On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 8:56 AM, Argent Stonecutter wrote: > On 2010-03-11, at 07:48, Lear Cale wrote: >> I disagree, Argent.  If the server process does explicit swapping for >> script memory, it would have a dramatica

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-11 Thread Lear Cale
s to do. Sorry. > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:56:36AM -0500, Lear Cale wrote: >> If it were a simple change, I'm sure it would be considered.  What >> you're suggesting sounds like would require a massive rewrite.  I >> agree that a dynamic system would be much

Re: [opensource-dev] [server-beta] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-11 Thread Lear Cale
I disagree, Argent. If the server process does explicit swapping for script memory, it would have a dramatically lower impact on the server process as a whole, and no impact on the other server processes sharing the same machine. > It doesn't matter whether the swapping is done by the OS or by th

Re: [opensource-dev] Script memory limit vs server CPU utilization as a key metric

2010-03-11 Thread Lear Cale
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 7:18 AM, Carlo Wood wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 03:51:31AM -0800, Ann Otoole wrote: >> If you guys want to really help then give us the ability to disable scripts >> by >> attachment creator name. There are certain products that cause problems. Made >> by people LL pr

Re: [opensource-dev] [server-beta] Script Memory ManagementAlgorithm

2010-03-10 Thread Lear Cale
Which is what we mean by "cost". Price is what you are asked to pay. Cost is what you actually pay. Thus the phrase "cost/benefit analysis" -- not "price/benefit analysis". On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:46 AM, Maggie Leber (sl: Maggie Darwin) wrote: > On Wed, Ma

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-10 Thread Lear Cale
If it were a simple change, I'm sure it would be considered. What you're suggesting sounds like would require a massive rewrite. I agree that a dynamic system would be much better, easier to code and less wasted memory. But without detailed knowledge of how the system is currently implemented, i

Re: [opensource-dev] [server-beta] Script Memory ManagementAlgorithm

2010-03-10 Thread Lear Cale
There's a semantic issue here that we need to clear up. When we say how much memory a script is "actually using", that means the amount of memory the script is making semantic usage of. However, the script is *allocated* a larger amount. This larger amount is the amount that matters to the syste

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-10 Thread Lear Cale
. Lear On Tue, Mar 9, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Michael Schlenker wrote: > > Am 09.03.2010 um 02:54 schrieb Lear Cale: > >> huh?  Can you point to existing technology for this analyzer?  Seems >> to me like it would require an oracle. > > It might require an oracle to reach 100%, but

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
Please tell me how to register for this list. I was registered for sldev, but don't remember how. ___ Policies and (un)subscribe information available here: http://wiki.secondlife.com/wiki/OpenSource-Dev Please read the policies before posting to keep un

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Management Algorithm

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
huh? Can you point to existing technology for this analyzer? Seems to me like it would require an oracle. On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Michael Schlenker wrote: > > Am 08.03.2010 um 18:46 schrieb Kelly Linden: > >> We are not out to write a new malloc for mono.  What we have is a system >>

Re: [opensource-dev] Question regarding llSetLinkPimitiveParamsFast() function in 1.38.0

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
It's generally a bad idea to change behavior dramatically, and much safer to add a new function. Dramatic changes in behavior cause new bugs, or cause old but insignificant bugs to become significant. New functions don't. On Sun, Mar 7, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Obsidian Kindragon wrote: > Hi all, > >

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Limits UI

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
It used to be that simple, with original LSO. With mono, it's more complicated, because two instances of the *exact* same script can share the code segments. I wonder whether this sharing ability will be taken into account. Ideally yes, because it's best when the metrics used to measure somethin

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Limits UI

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
Babbage has already said that LSO code will be "charged" 64K even though it only uses 16K. Perhaps he's changed that decision -- is that the case? Regards Jeff On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 9:02 PM, Frans wrote: > In response to the OP. I agree the UI will have to present that information > differentl

Re: [opensource-dev] Script Memory Limits UI

2010-03-08 Thread Lear Cale
It would be nice if everything were free, too. The issue is memory *allocation*. If a script only uses 16K but is allocated 64K, that 64K counts against the server's actual memory allocation limit. So, cool, wouldn't it be nice to only allocate what is actually requested? Well that implies rewr