[freenet-dev] Re: Don't upgrade to 6269

[Martin Stone Davis]

Costas Dokolas wrote:

-----Original Message-----
From: Ian Clarke [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 9:13 AM
To: Discussion of development issues
Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Re: Don't upgrade to 6269
Todd Walton wrote:

You (Toad) and whoever few also agreed to this beforehand 
have basically 

taken control of everyone's node without permission, 
inflicting, in the 

process, irreversible damage (removal of the routing table).
Rubbish, nobody forced you to upgrade to the post-fork build, 
and nobody 
prevented you from subscribing to the CVS mailing list so you 
could make 
an informed decision about whether to upgrade.


I'd certainly expect something as important as this to be posted on "devl"
and "announce". The CVS list is not enough. I may not have subscribed to the
CVS list even if I knew of it's existence. Isn't the CVS list supposed to
carry mainly info pertaining to CVS commits? Is the fork such a mundane
detail? I think not.
I'm personaly not displeased of the fork itself, only the breakdown in
communications, i.e. properly informing all those nice people out there
using unstable. 
True, it would have been nice if it had been made clear to all using the 
unstable that they should be not only reading "devl" but also CVS and 
IRC://freenode/freenet, but it was only *30 MINUTES* between Toad 
starting to make changes and him posting detailed instructions on devl 
about what to do.  Hard for me to see how this should cause such a fuss.

Is the project doing them a service by releasing unstable
builds, or are they doing a service for the project by using/testing it? 
A little of both?  But everyone's ultimate goal is to get the thing 
working ASAP.  That's why Toad decided to fork the network at this time. 
 As someone who doesn't really know the code, I'm happy to trust his 
decision.

In my company we have a particular client on whom we deploy major new features
of our product and we tend to bend over backwards (to use an american term)
for this client because of this priviledge.
I bet that client is paying your company a lot more than we're paying 
Toad.  But seriously, I just fail to see how Toad is harming the users.

This particular fork is a more delicate matter than you and Toad assumed.

Doc


-Martin

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl