Bold indeed. Necessary, in my opinion. The complexity that the project will ultimately face due to disparate and poorly documented code will eventually outweigh the benefits even of holding on to current users.
The currently complex code also means that Freenet may become a security joke, which is not acceptable. My contributions have been limited but I believe this would be a step in the right direction. Thanks, Mike On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Ian <i...@locut.us> wrote: > For those that appear to be craving a "bold new strategy", one thing I've > proposed in the past would be to put the main Freenet codebase in > "maintenance mode", and throw our resources behind > http://tahrirproject.org/ > (possibly renaming it "Freenet 2" since Tahrir is a terrible name). > > Tahrir addresses several key concerns: > > - The people we actually want to help, those in China, Iran, etc, often > have very constrained bandwidth. Tahrir is designed for this, Freenet > is a > bandwidth hog > - Tahrir is designed for a Twitter/Facebook type use-case > ("microblogging"), which has proven very powerful in terms of promoting > political change > - It's a fresh-ish codebase, much smaller, although needs some cobwebs > blown off > - Can incorporate a mixnet, but actually better suited to a mixnet than > Tor because latency is less of an issue > > Clearly, this would not be a direct successor to Freenet, it would not be > backwards compatible, and would be designed for a different (but perhaps > more current) use-case. > > Thoughts? > > Ian. > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl@freenetproject.org > https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
