* Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-05-16 09:21:10]: > On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 5:09 PM, Colin Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can certainly understand where you're coming from, and agree that it > > would be ideal, but I don't think that Freenet is ready to be promoted > > by application development.. Currently, when Freenet makes a new > > revision, that hits Slashdot, Reddit, etc, and encourages people to > > download.. A new revision of Frost/etc doesn't make a blip, and > > certainly doesn't spur much action. > > But the same argument could be used in my Java analogy. Java has a > far higher profile than many apps written in Java, but it doesn't > follow that Java should bundle all of these apps. >
Heh, java has a frozen API... last time I checked ours is neither frozen nor even versioned! [snip.] > > If you did want to push Freenet-the-service, rather than > > Freenet-the-program, I'd suggest that for the late .7 and early .8 you > > continue the focus on making the install simpler.. For example, the > > project could create a Freenet-for-embedded.zip, which defaults to > > opennet only, auto-detects it's IP, and joins the network when the .jar > > is run, rather than asking the user any questions. > > Well, I've been describing Freenet as a platform since around 1999 - > there is nothing new about this. I think we do need to do some work > to make Freenet more easily embedded, possibly as you suggest. > What about fproxy; shall it be separated from fred too ? I think it should be a plugin to the node.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
