On Friday 23 October 2009 23:27:34 zero3 wrote: > > Awesomeness! > > Did the merge succeed without issues? Any problematic conflicts?
Several files had issues, I sided with the beta branch. > > The reason for the "Browse Freenet" to "Launch Freenet" rename in the first > place, was that Freenet is starting to do much other stuff than "browsing > [websites]". Mail, forums, IM, file sharing. "Browse" sounds a bit > misleading as a common verb for that. Maybe something completely different? Open Freenet? > > I'm responsible for turning the incognito flag back on. I really think the > block should be placed in Freenet (by simply checking the user-agent), as > the block can then easily be removed on a new build when Google have fixed > Chrome. If it's placed in the launcher, we can't push the update to enable > it again later on, as we depend on people updating their helper executables > themselves. Which they probably won't (it's possible via the new tray > manager though). Hmmm, okay. It is disabled in fproxy at the moment, so I will reinstate the change you made, but I will add comments on both sides. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 835 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20091023/e0520292/attachment.pgp>
