On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 10:17 PM, Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> wrote: >> Really? ?I don't see much functionality that fits that description. >> Sure, the advanced mode config and stats pages get rather long. ?But >> surely implementing those is no harder than implementing the simple >> mode ones. > > There is a lot. ?Core functionality is being able to surf web pages, > download and upload files, participate in the forums, and perhaps this new > blogging thing.
And configuring Freenet, and verifying that your node is healthy, and adding darknet peers. And probably searching as well. >> > I must be forgetting something. ?What is the problem with building GWT? >> > ?AFAIK, the entire stack is open source. >> >> First, I haven't actually tried to build it (and don't intend to, >> given what I've heard). ?If someone who has cares to speak up, go with >> what they have to say. > > Wait, are you referring to what is required to compile Java to Javascript > using GWT, or what is required to compile the entire GWT development toolset > from source? ?I see no reason that we need to do the latter, any more than > we need to compile Eclipse or javac from source before using it. You can't build those? That's news to me. I believe they're both available in Gentoo and Debian, both of which require a clean build from source, iirc. (javac in the form of OpenJDK, which Freenet runs just fine on afaik.) At present building Freenet does not require any tool that can't be built from source. I don't think that's a mandatory property: when Freenet started, this was not true of Java, and I think that was a reasonable decision. But I don't think it's a property we should give up lightly, either. Anyway, as I said already, I don't see much point in arguing if your mind is made up. Evan Daniel
