> > Most of the responses regarded the politics & PR aspects of > enabling the sharing of .mp3's. Trying to be helpful on a > technical level, I tossed out the idea of a system called "LARS". > > It would be a *very* stripped-down system, incompatable with > regular Freenet, which used rigid naming conventions and openly- > published directories instead of nearly any of the features & > protections offered by Freenet. The core idea is to keep people > happy with something that's a step above Napster, while using > only the most stable & tested sections of Freenet code. After > Freenet is stable enough for general release, the quick hack > would be dropped. > > There were no responses to the message, so I'm going to assume > that there is no interest in that sort of concept. I'll drop > the idea, and work on something else. I guess I'll look at > GUI wrappers some more, unless someone suggests a dire need > elsewhere.
I don't think the fact that we didn't acknowledge you means that you shouldn't develop it. We can't and won't tell people what to write and what not to write. However, politically its a bad idea for the core development effort to do such a thing. Outside the main development push we have no control. Scott -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000726/721aac04/attachment.pgp>
