Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > On Sat, 27 May 2000, Ian Clarke wrote: > > Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > > > > > I think you are looking at the wrong GUI client. There is a class > > > Freenet.client.GUI that Ian wrote over a weekend many months ago, but > > > that was > > > then discarded half finished (AFAIK). I think Ian took the wrong route by > > > not > > > integrating this with the existing RequestClient and InsertClient classes > > > used > > > for the CLI clients (they also need work though). > > > > If I recall I don't think RequestClient and InsertClient were written at > > that time, at least, they certainly weren't suitable to be used by an > > external process. In fact, it was as a result of my efforts that I > > wrote the "Client" class which I think prompted some of the client > > abstraction work that you refer to above. > > Noop. I wrote the RequestClient and InsertClient classes a week or so before > you wrote the GUI class. Their structure has not changed much since, and the > abstraction used by the GUI clients (contrib.SimpleClient) wraps around them.
I stand corrected - but anyway work on the Freenet.client.GUI class really ground to a halt before any significant work was done on the guts of the comms stuff anyway, the reason work ground to a halt was due to caution over creating a dependency on Swing and thus losing 1.1 compatibility. I am still of the opinion that client development effort should be concentrated on Freeloader. Ian. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
