I don't know what a model-view-controller approach is, but if you say it
adds an extra layer of abstraction, then it doesn't matter anyway.
The UI is defined in XML and so is called XUI. Admiral Admiral and I
wrote some patches that, among other things, let you instantiate a
floater from XML o
Ponzu wrote:
> Just a gentle reminder. This is NOT a forum for debating the merits of
> this or that Viewer.
>
> This is the forum for discussing Viewer 2 development.
But it IS a forum for debating the merits of this or that feature of any
viewer (SL based or otherwise) or any possible feat
Yoz Grahame wrote:
> When people are asked to explain why they don't
> like it, they focus on a small but high-profile set of these changes,
That is quite disingenuous. People usually start by saying the complete
2.x UI is terrible and they prefer the 1.x UI. Then Lindens ask about
specifics
dilly dobbs wrote:
> Now we need to get others to come and chat about it and see if we can
> come up with a plan.
Have a look at VWR-10293 and don't skip all of the closed issues there.
Many were closed because of Linden's perception that they had fixed
the new user experience when they got
You're half right :-)
Change the other "LLFILE* fptr =" to "fptr =" as well.
Mike
Tiggs Linden wrote:
> You're shadowing fptr in the last if clause:
> if (!fptr)
>{
>LLFILE* fptr = LLFile::fopen(oldLogFileName(filename),
> "r");/*Flawfinder: ignore*/
>
Latif Khalifa wrote:
> Looking through VWR-19505 I see the comment by the dev who made a fix
> that you have requested a user story. Do we really need user stories
> for bugs?
I would expect the user story would be something like:
"When I did X, I expected Y, but got Z."
It helps to discriminat
Henri Beauchamp wrote:
> SL is the ONLY so-called (but actually still not, obviously: a Canada-Dry
> LGPL, perhaps ?) LGPL Open Source project requiring a License agreement
> from its contributors !!! This makes strictly no sense and is a clear
> impairement.
>
> I'd also be curious to know any o
mysticaldem...@xrgrid.com wrote:
> ... I personally see at least 4 UI
> implementations that are needed, 1) web based light weight. 2) Mobile,
> maybe no 3D. 3. Typical user. 4. Power user or designer.
"no 3D" That's an interesting idea. At first it seems that having 3D
would be essential,
Bryon Ruxton wrote:
> I think addressing the hurdles that prevent people still on 1.23 to
> move to 2.0 before you get into
> “Rapid, effective deployment of new features and functionality.” is the
> most urgent priority in my opinion.
Seconded.
___
Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> * Improve the user experience
> o Make continuous improvements to the design and
> implementation of the Viewer’s user interface.
Will the User Experience office hours be resurrected? Will anyone go
back and look at the archives of pa
Oz Linden (Scott Lawrence) wrote:
> This is just a quick note to introduce myself - I'm Scott Lawrence, and
> this week I've become Oz Linden. I've just started at Linden Lab as the
> Director of Open Development.
OS. Oz. I see what you did there. With the "wizard" allusion. Very
clever. :
Nyx Linden wrote:
> It would also require completely de-constructing the current layers
> system, and rebuilding it based on the added parameters (I'd actually
> argue making the parameters part of the links used to create an outfit,
> not the wearables themselves but that's a side note).
A whi
Nyx Linden wrote:
> Interesting proposal, and one probably worthy of further investigation.
> My concern with this plan is that the conversion from one wearable type
> to another is very much non-trivial. The wearable parameters (sleeve
> length, etc) have no relation to each other between weara
Nyx, would you be willing to come to the User Experience Interest Group
meeting, Thursdays from 3-4PM at Hippotropolis (
http://slurl.com/secondlife/Hippotropolis/43/104/25 ), or share your
thoughts on the sl-ux mailing list? Jacek Antonelli (copied here) is
the moderator of the UXIG meeting.
+1
Mike
Jesse Barnett wrote:
> Jeez I fail to understand why in the heck LL can not understand this
> simple concept.
>
> Linden devs have introduced bugs before that have allowed content to be
> stolen, no mod scripts to be readable, and inventories worth several
> hundred dollars to vanish
Soft Linden wrote:
> What I'm trying really hard to get across here is that keeping
> discussions civil, focused and constructive will help foster community
> involvement. Q is working really hard to make sure that a feature held
> in the dark for business reasons will never hold the rest of the
>
Soft,
It is not clear whether Linden Lab wants an open source community. The
impression from this side is that Linden wants help fixing bugs, but not
fixing features, but if that requires importing a feature or two, then
it's worth the trouble.
It is also quite clear that Linden does not want
Except for Merov's contributions, I don't think Snowglobe ever had a
planned direction. The direction was just the sum of the contributions
people made to it. And I expect it will continue that way. If someone
thinks that chat needs to be fixed and they have the time to fix it,
then they pro
So you've created this Third Party Viewer Directory in order to
*promote* third part viewers? *That's* your "why"? Well, you needn't
have bothered. You did much more to promote third party viewers by
releasing Viewer 2.0.
Mike
Soft Linden wrote:
> I feel I should add too - this isn't all st
Howard Look wrote:
> from here. But I want to reiterate: *We are committed to open source and
> to supporting the open development community.* We embrace the notion
> that this community develops viewers that serve the needs of a wide
> range of Residents while we pursue a broader consumer marke
Client-side scripts can only operate on data that is client-side. It
means that they do not operated directly on in-world objects. They only
access the client's representation of those objects. Any actions
performed by a client-side script would only be visible to that
particular client. So
OK. I get it. You like fanning the fires of flame wars.
Very funny.
Mike
k\o\w wrote:
> I for one agree with Q. The biggest complaints come from the most
> insignificant people. If LL prioritized development based on the
> complaints in this mailing list, they would be rewriting SL for Linux
If you were trying to have an open discussion, then you went about it
quite wrong. Nothing was mentioned on this mailing list. I don't think
anything was mentioned in the Open Source Meeting (which has of late
become nothing more than a Snowglobe bug triage) and I don't see any
transcripts on
Seems like you're looking for a shortcut. The main Snowglobe page says
> The Get source and compile page gives general information about how to
> compile the source. For a quick step-by-step instruction for building on
> Linux, see Compiling and Patching Snowglobe (Linux).
Did you look at http
code 0 means no fail. Check the log file.
Mike
Andrew Simpson wrote:
> hello is there is anyone why my build fail to start after it compiled?
>
>
> i get this
> 'secondlife-bin.exe': Loaded 'C:\Program Files
> (x86)\QuickTime\QTSystem\QuickTimeCapture.qtx'
> The thread 'Win32 Thread' (0x1998)
25 matches
Mail list logo
