Florent Daigni?re skrev: > * Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> [2008-11-26 22:39:58]: > > >>>> Will there be one available within reasonable time perhaps, or will >>>> we have to depend on the non-free one later on? >>>> >>> Ensuring that the code works reliably on other jvms takes dev's time >>> we'd rather spare somewhere else. It's all a matter of priorities, like >>> usual. >>> >>> >> We all know? That didn't quite answer though: >> >> >>>> Will there be one available within reasonable time perhaps, >>>> > > Go and ask people who write free jvms, not me. >
Could be that you had some knowledge about the "jvm market", since you know that they at least do not provide the features Freenet needs? > >> and >> >> >>>> will we have to depend on the non-free one later on? >>>> > > Why would we have to depend on something? To get our packages included > into the main repository of some distributions (that includes debian), > yes, we would have to get rid of our dependancy on non-free software. > > But that's not our problem: that's the packager's one, isn't it? There > is no reason to make it *our* problem. > > You said we did, not me? Surely it is the devs problem if Freenet can't be made available in linux distro repositories because of depencies to non-free software? >>>>>>> The idea is to minimize the amount of data to download in order >>>>>>> to both spare bandwidth and reduce the overall installation >>>>>>> time. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Not worth the trouble/annoyances/extra download time/... IMHO. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> That's your view, not mine. Come back with figures and real arguments if >>>>> you plan to be convincing. Last time I checked I am the one who wrote >>>>> that part of the code... So I am the one who decides how it's done. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> That seems like an awfully closed-minded attitude for a collaborative >>>> open-source project like Freenet. >>>> >>>> Being hosted at SourceForge, I can't see bandwidth being a problem? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> We left SourceForge years ago because of their chronical unreliability. >>> >>> >> Oh. What's http://sourceforge.net/projects/freenet/ all about then? >> >> > > Nothing.. PR I guess... I told toad to get rid of it. Did you see that > there is only a README downloadable over there? > > Look closer: http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=978&package_id=973 >>>> But since you want some figures: I just did a test install. >>>> Downloading and setting up the plugins took the installer ~10 >>>> seconds on a 2 year old mainstream laptop with Windows XP. The >>>> plugins take up 383 KB. I don't know how many people that uncheck >>>> any or all of the plugins before installing, but I doubt it's a >>>> large part. Even if *everybody* unchecked all plugins in the >>>> installer and we assume nobody will ever install them later on, the >>>> overhead would be less than 4% of the ~10 MB that was downloaded >>>> during the install. In reality, that number will be *much* smaller >>>> as many people *will* install the plugins. If SourceForge can't >>>> keep up with that little extra bandwidth, I'll be glad to donate. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> We did call for mirrors a while back, and we usually do before we >>> announce any new release. >>> >>> Right now we have 6 working ones and 13 configured. >>> >>> >>> >> What are the requirements, besides standard HTTP access to the actual files? >> >> > > Being able to run a gnu/rsync client to get the files on a regular > basis. We do ask mirrors to pull updates very frequently. > > I've got an account on dreamhost.net with virtually unlimited bandwidth and shell/cron access, so if you can provide me with whatever command line arguments rsync should use, it shouldn't be a problem. It's not enterprise-level uptime, but I haven't had more than a single or two outages in the years I've been with them. Server is physically located in USA. >>>>>>> I don't get what you mean here. Are you seriously suggesting >>>>>>> that multi-user computers should run multiple, concurrent >>>>>>> nodes? It's not like running a freenet node was overhead >>>>>>> less... nor like we wanted to maximize churn. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> Not at all! I'm suggesting that users share the program files and >>>>>> machine settings (which should be equal for all users) but *do >>>>>> not* share identities and user-specific settings (privacy and >>>>>> customization concerns). Atm., everything is shared on Windows >>>>>> and nothing is shared on Linux. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> That's because there is no easy way of "sharing" stuffs on Linux. There >>>>> is a bug ticket for it and it's a long-overdue. I just didn't get around >>>>> to >>>>> implement it yet. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I'm not sure I understand you. Doesn't most applications do this? >>>> Keep the program files in the "public space", and the settings >>>> inside the users' home folders (in hidden subfolders)? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> You are not comparing similar applications... Freenet is different from >>> emule/bittorent... you should compare it to servers: Apache/Mysql... or >>> even MLDonkey if you want to stay in the field of what is called "p2p >>> software" by users... Like for them, we do require a high uptime... and >>> like for them there is no per-user settings. >>> >>> >> Freenet has user settings, yes? Darknet friends, fproxy bookmarks, >> fproxy theme and misc settings, ... Or am I misunderstanding you? >> >> > > That's not user-settings. Darknet friends definitely aren't; And each > application can have its own private download queue (hidden from other > users). > > Bookmarks might be at a later stage but aren't either right now. > > I know they are not at the moment, but they *should* be, right? Multiple users shouldn't share those things?!? >>>> I totally agree with you - that the devs should make all the >>>> decisions. All I ask for is that the users aren't flamed to death >>>> because they kindly spend their freetime trying to improve the >>>> project by writing down their thoughts and opinions. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>> Some people (myself included, indeed) have different opinions. >>>>>> (It was discussed on this mailing list a while ago I think - and >>>>>> on IRC on multiple occasions). Both sides have supporters. I'm >>>>>> not aware of when Freenet was a service and when not. Atm. I can >>>>>> just comment on how Freenet works today. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> I don't intend to be rude here but that's what you are missing here: >>>>> history and experience. Most of what you have been suggesting has >>>>> already been tried or is on the TODO list. >>>>> >>>>> We had packages, we had a MSIS installer, ... and the list goes on. >>>>> >>>>> If you really think it's important and you're willing to make things go >>>>> forward, gets your hand dirty and get on coding :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> I'm trying to, actually. The barriers for actually getting a chance >>>> to do something are kind of... tough... for Freenet though. Have >>>> been for me, at least. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> We can work towards easing that... writing documentation. But as far as >>> I know no one asked for it so far (except Ian in a former email on this >>> thread) >>> >>> >>> >> Actually, the greatest barrier seems to be the people, IMHO. >> > > Alright... fork then. > > Surely that wouldn't benefit Freenet as a whole, or the general shortage of dev power? You could also simply work towards being more friendly to people, you know... I don't know with everybody else, but I didn't come here to annoy people. I actually write here in the hope that I might in some way or another support this project and its goals. If I am not, please say so, and I will simply leave you all alone. >> Documentation and easier methods of messing around with the code is on >> the list too, yea. If none is available, people probably won't even ask >> for it (I wouldn't!). >> > > OAHHH! > That's productive behaviour. > > In case it exists and you missed it you won't ever know... > In case it doesn't it's obviously the best way to ensure there won't be > any anytime soon. > > Yeah, you might be right, people have different ways of working and we > don't seem to work the same way. I did write one installer so I > obviously know how it works and how it's supposed to... If I don't hear > that someone else is interested by some documentation, why exactly shall > I write any? The code speaks for itself after all. > > Random example: Do you think Counter-Strike would ever have been made if Valve hadn't released the HL-SDK? As far as I remember, nobody asked Valve to, yet they did, and one of the most popular games ever were created by random fans. In general terms, I strongly believe that supply often creates demand. We might disagree on that too, I guess. Not worth the discussion. I didn't ask you to write any documentation. I didn't ask for you to do it. I just support the proposal... - Zero3
