On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 10:56:26PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote: > FCP - yet another Freenet TLA - ho hum.
yep ;) > OTOH, the whole point of FCP is to minimise the effort in implementing > clients in different languages. From this perspective it makes little > sense to force 99% of client writers to reimplement somewhat complex > functionality, increasing the probability of incompatabilities, and > discourging people from writing clients at-all. The node shouldn't handle Metadata. People can put any library wrapppers around FCP they like. If clients want high-level access, use the library. If not - don't. I don't even think that fproxy should be tightly in the node. There should be a FCP fproxy which handles Metadata for the browsers, and the metadata handling can be split off it other people want it. AGL -- Never underestimate the power of a small tactical nuclear weapon. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 240 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010227/2f0c1abe/attachment.pgp>
