On Tuesday, November 03, 2015 12:00:06 PM Ian 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?
Argh. 1000% nononononononononono. Sorry :) Freenet is fine. The codebase is fine. So many people people are currently working on it every day that it's hard for me to keep up with replying to every discussion. Just because random people start childish "java is teh sucks!!1" flamewars on the mailing list does not mean we suddenly have to give up. All we should give up on is the whole "rewrite" discussions. If someone wants to rewrite, he should do that on their own mailing lists. Thats the way it works anyway: A rewrite of a project is a fork. A fork is not the original project. So they should use their mailing lists, not ours. This only distracts developers. These discussions have been so much of a distraction recently that I even already have a draft of a mail which requests changing the IRC channel policy to disallow rewrite discussions. This is strongly indicated because the whole of these discussions might even be the QUEEN-program attack [2]: Disturb developers so much with outrageous demands that they spent 100% of their time in discussing with the attacker; and 0% on writing code. And besides requesting people to migrate to a different project, please don't do this rename of Tahir, ever. It would be an almost rogue act which only confused users. As long as Tahir cannot do all which Freenet can do [1], it is not "Freenet 2". Even if it had all features, it couldn't really be "Freenet 2" until it was a binary compatible alternate client: Once a software has existed for >15 years, people will keep using it, no matter how much you try to force them not to. If you forcefully fork Freenet, people will just fork it back and continue working on what it originally was. In fact that's what I would seriously consider doing if people tried to force- split the project. So please just use an own name for a software of its own. Sorry if I have to brush this off very strongly like I just did, but we're really getting to the point where discussions yield demands which are so far beyond what we need that a clear "no!" is needed. Again: Freenet works. The code is usable. I work with it as my daily routine, and there is absolutely no reason to give up. Greetings [1] https://wiki.freenetproject.org/Projects [2] http://draketo.de/english/freenet/de-orchestrating-phk -- hopstolive (keyword for Ians spam filter)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
