* Zero3 <zero3 at zerosplayground.dk> [2008-11-26 23:33:47]: > 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? >
No it's not. We do provide sources, and we do provide a cross-platform installer: everything else isn't our problem... That's the point of outsourcing it: sparing our dev's time. > >>>>>>> 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 > Yeah... all I see below "current" is a README file. Why don't you tell me what I should be looking for? > >>>> 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. > Cool. I might contact you soon to set a new mirror up then. > >>>>>>> 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?!? > What are you doing here? Stating the obvious? I am tired of people saying what should and shouldn't be done. If you want to express your views do it using the appropriate channel: fill in enhancement requests on the bug tracker! > >>>> 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? Hmmmm. Once more I fail to understand the logic here: Either: - you don't like the people => you don't contribute (what happens according to what you were saying) - you fork and then you actually start doing something How can it be less productive than doing nothing? > You could also simply work towards being more friendly to > people, you know... So the problem is not about "the people" but me? I might consider leaving you know... If I'm the problem. That's the last reply you'll get from me if that's what you want. > I don't know with everybody else, but I didn't come > here to annoy people. Me neither... But I am usually annoyed by users. > 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. Afaic you remember wrong. People did ask for it. > 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... > That's exactly what I'm reproaching you. Until Ian suggested it I didn't even think about documenting how the installer works... because no one asked for it... and the only one else who was involved with it (Matthew) did review the code and understands it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20081126/8af8e3e9/attachment.pgp>
