[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

g amphibian at users.sourceforge.net Freenet/Coldstore open source hacker. Employed full time by Freenet Project Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/b46a8a8f/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] defaults

.ng Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/d1cc47fb/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

> > > From: > Ian Clarke > Date: > Sat, 19 Oct 2002 14:17:35 -0700 > > >>It is my understanding that the mozilla project does *exactly* what >>Oskar suggests (with the exception that their check-in freeze periods >>are a *month* now). >> >> > >So whenever a bug is discovered during that time,

[freenet-dev] Re: [Announce] Freenet 0.5pre4

ignature.ng Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/d658760c/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On October 19, 2002 08:05 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 07:34:43PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > The linux kernel used to go directly from pre to release - this caused > > problems more often than not. Now after the last pre, there are a few > > release candidates to clean up an

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/c16492f9/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

ian.dyndns.org amphibian at users.sourceforge.net Freenet/Coldstore open source hacker. Employed full time by Freenet Project Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/24489219/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:44:35PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: <> > In ONE day??? Its going to take a week to get this done right. I would > suggest that we annouce rc1 on Wednesday, with the goal of releasing 0.5 > a week from then. This will also encourage freesite operators to update > their

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

p://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > -- Matthew Toseland toad at amphibian.dyndns.org amphibian at users.sourceforge.net Freenet/Coldstore open source hacker. Employed full time by Freenet Project Inc. from 11/9/02 to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/a3767033/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, r2q2 wrote: > I have an idea similar where also an SSK is used > but DCHKs (dated content hash keys) are inserted by the streamer > and the nodes retrieve each CHK in a series. Eventually the CHK's would > expire on btw, i'm coding this up now anyhow. Are ogg streams a

Interesting exception was [kab...@hush.com: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero]

> On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: <> > > Oct 19, 2002 11:52:35 AM (freenet.node.Node, QThread-9): Error while > > receiving message freenet.Message: ClientPut @cb2bc634b2ca4d6a in state New > > ClientPut @ cb2bc634b2ca4d6a > > java.lang.IllegalAccessError: tried to access method > >

[freenet-dev] Yet another windows release

Here's another windows-webinstall.exe release. This should hopefully fix the "javafind found java, then install told me it still couldn't find java" problems. Also some changes on temporary directory settings to allow one setting for them all. Everyone, please download and test it (save your freen

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, fish wrote: > > http://www.dspaudio.com/~jaymz/freenet-mp3-stream-v2-test2.tar.gz > > this test is for linux people only (the stuff will work on windows with a > little massaging, but there are no exe's and no canned configs), and needs > python 2.2. This is just for testin

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On October 19, 2002 04:01 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:44:35PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > In ONE day??? Its going to take a week to get this done right. I would > > suggest that we announce rc1 on Wednesday, with the goal of releasing 0.5 > > a week from then. This will

[freenet-dev] Metadata

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:41:21AM -0400, David Allen wrote: <> > Currently, the behavior of fred is to load the default document from a > mapfile when a nonexistant document name is requested. I.e. > SSK at Zk3lWHDM6VzA5k4nZWOq5xPl1rkPAgM/FreenetGallery/1//doesnt/exist.txt > returns the front p

Interesting exception was [kab...@hush.com: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero]

to 11/11/02. http://freenetproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/fe75674e/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] defaults

A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 187 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/af6819e6/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] defaults

netproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/31a99a24/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/6259833d/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 05:52:54PM +1000, fish wrote: > > The major issue, is that in this case, later portions of the audio *will* > > drop off the network. you have been warned. > > This may be avoided if, say, for every three streams requested in-or

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

one thing I forgot to mention with live streams it is desirable for such streams to insert at a *low* htl, and retrieve at a *high* one, as oppsed to the freenet behaviour usually of equality between the two - so, say, insert @ 10, retrieve @ 25. - fish On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, fish wr

[freenet-dev] defaults

since the FEC default blocksize question came up, I thought I'd ask poeple waht the defaults should be for the following variables: - htl - refresh time (in days) any help here would be appriciated :) ___ devl mailing list devl at fre

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: I've actully implented freenet streams back in the day, and i had 3 or 4 people actully tell me that they were able to retrieve them somewhat. I, however, pay for data now, and can't be doing this anymore If people would like me to very quickly fix

[freenet-dev] Windows Installer

I got the new windows installer and experienced the same problem with it not creating the flaunch.ini correctly. However, in the log, it says the file size is 1075 which is the correct size. So, somewhere along the way the flaunch.ini is getting overwritten. Here is an excerpt from the install.l

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

Wouldn't everybody be happier if you gave them more time to think about things? We all want 0.5 to come out, but what is the hurry? Right now, we could decide on a date. The date can be one or two weeks away, but it will be a fixed date. Everyone works towards that date, and there are no surprise

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 16:06, ian wrote: Sorry about the preceding empty message. > > We should do the release only after the code is stable. The only way to > > know the code is stable is to test it. > > This is exactly what we have been doing for the last 15 days. Frozen means you don't ch

[freenet-dev] Windows Installer

I got the new windows installer and experienced the same problem with it not creating the flaunch.ini correctly. However, in the log, it says the file size is 1075 which is the correct size. So, somewhere along the way the flaunch.ini is getting overwritten. Here is an excerpt from the install.l

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

anzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/3c561493/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

> > > From: > Ian Clarke > Date: > Sat, 19 Oct 2002 13:12:28 -0700 > > >That is a rediculously conservative approach for any software, let-alone >a beta product. It would virtually guarantee that we don't get a >release for perhaps two months, while actively *discouraging* people >from fixing min

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 16:06, you wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 > > > > release. > > > > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. > > I am not deciding a

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

In message <003801c277bf$9856cf00$0100a8c0@cyr>, u Uler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes Wouldn't everybody be happier if you gave them more time to think about things? We all want 0.5 to come out, but what is the hurry? Right now, we could decide on a date. The date can be one or two weeks away, but i

[freenet-dev] Yet another windows release

Here's another windows-webinstall.exe release. This should hopefully fix the "javafind found java, then install told me it still couldn't find java" problems. Also some changes on temporary directory settings to allow one setting for them all. Everyone, please download and test it (save your freen

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 07:34:43PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > The linux kernel used to go directly from pre to release - this caused > problems more often than not. Now after the last pre, there are a few > release candidates to clean up any lingering nasty problems. Suggest > that freenet can

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On October 19, 2002 04:01 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:44:35PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > > In ONE day??? Its going to take a week to get this done right. I would > > suggest that we announce rc1 on Wednesday, with the goal of releasing 0.5 > > a week from then. This will

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sun, 20 Oct 2002, fish wrote: > > http://www.dspaudio.com/~jaymz/freenet-mp3-stream-v2-test2.tar.gz > > this test is for linux people only (the stuff will work on windows with a > little massaging, but there are no exe's and no canned configs), and needs > python 2.2. This is just for testin

[freenet-dev] Metadata

On Saturday 19 October 2002 13:12, Oskar wrote: > I have no idea how fproxy will react to this (considering it's > cludginess level, probably badly), so somebody should test it. Don't hold anything back. Tell us how you really feel. ;-) I tested it briefly. It appears to be working. Froxy retur

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > I think we should delay. We need time to sort out the windoze > installers, _and test them_. I will be very unhappy indeed if the Windows installer delays the release. > I have discovered some problems recently > whose solutions

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

Even if you are technically ready to release 0.5, I'd inform journalists at least a week ahead of time. They need just as much time as you do. > -Original Message- > From: devl-admin at freenetproject.org > [mailto:devl-admin at freenetproject.org]On Behalf Of Ian Clarke > Sent: Saturday,

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

ist > devl at freenetproject.org > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- Ian Clarkeian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.com] Latest Project http://cematics.com/kanzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/4d732be8/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 13:54, Ian wrote: > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. NO! We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. We should do the release only after the code is stable. The only way to know the code is stable is to test

Re: [freenet-dev] defaults

fish ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > wow, really? most site authors I've spoken too have said that 10 is > liketly to drop off the network, and that 20 is more acceptable... go > figure That was probably true during the ~511 days when inserts were broken. I've been inserting my site with HTL 10 and

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 11:34:41PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > I think we should delay. We need time to sort out the windoze > installers, _and test them_. I will be very unhappy indeed if the Windows installer delays the release. > I have discovered some problems recently > whose solutions

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

To quote myself from the 2nd of October: --- The criteria for a 0.5 release needs to be a stable datastore - no more and no less. If we start saying "ooh, just let's add this feature" we will always be two weeks away from a release, but never actually get there. If people wish to fix other stuff

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

anyone who tries this, get http://.dspaudio.com/~jaymz/freenetmp3stream-test3.tar.gz , which is much more robust than the last one - fish ___ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:08:32PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 05:21:55PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > This is exactly what we have been doing for the last 15 days. > > Frozen means you don't change the code. The last change I saw was 3 hours > > ago. We have not

RE: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

Wouldn't everybody be happier if you gave them more time to think about things? We all want 0.5 to come out, but what is the hurry? Right now, we could decide on a date. The date can be one or two weeks away, but it will be a fixed date. Everyone works towards that date, and there are no surprise

Re: [freenet-dev] defaults

fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > - htl > > 10 for insert, 15-25 for fetch. > > wow, really? most site authors I've spoken too have said that 10 is > liketly to drop off the network, and that 20 is more acceptable... go > figure Several weeks ago there was a movement to insert HTLs in th

[freenet-dev] Re: [Announce] Freenet 0.5pre4

[no need to spam announce ...] [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Need news about freenet package for Linux Debian. > In Woody last package is freenet 0.4.0.1 That's just a dummy that will install the real package, which contains build 465 from April. Well, we have a stable woody now, so this will prob

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On October 19, 2002 01:54 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > > Getting good PR coverage is essential, as it will lead to wide > deployment and more donations with which we may be able to extend > Matthew's employment if he is intereste

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

tp://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/e4cbd134/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

est Project http://cematics.com/kanzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not avail

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

t available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/3b169825/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/74e8750d/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

> It is my understanding that the mozilla project does *exactly* what > Oskar suggests (with the exception that their check-in freeze periods > are a *month* now). So whenever a bug is discovered during that time, the clock is reset to 1 month from that time? I doubt that very much. > You also me

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 05:21:55PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > This is exactly what we have been doing for the last 15 days. > Frozen means you don't change the code. The last change I saw was 3 hours > ago. We have not been testing the same release image for 15 days. This attitute wou

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:53:02PM -0500, u Uler wrote: > Even if you are technically ready to release 0.5, I'd inform journalists at > least a week ahead of time. They need just as much time as you do. Nah, 3 days is more than enough. Most are glad to get 24 hours. Ian. -- Ian Clarke

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

From: Ian Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2002 13:12:28 -0700 That is a rediculously conservative approach for any software, let-alone a beta product. It would virtually guarantee that we don't get a release for perhaps two months, while actively *discouraging* people from fixing

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sun, Oct 20, 2002 at 06:37:49AM +1000, fish wrote: > > I am not deciding a release deadline based on PR concerns, I am deciding > > to have a release deadline based on PR concerns. > > The Windows installer is irrelevant, it has its own release schedule. > > You are going to want to kill me fo

RE: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

Even if you are technically ready to release 0.5, I'd inform journalists at least a week ahead of time. They need just as much time as you do. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:devl-admin@;freenetproject.org]On Behalf Of Ian Clarke > Sent: Saturday, 19 October, 2002

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/79a6478d/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. > > I am not deciding a release deadline b

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 16:06, ian wrote: Sorry about the preceding empty message. > > We should do the release only after the code is stable. The only way to > > know the code is stable is to test it. > > This is exactly what we have been doing for the last 15 days. Frozen means you don't ch

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/146bbecd/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:12:28PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > That is a rediculously conservative approach for any software, let-alone > a beta product. It would virtually guarantee that we don't get a > release for perhaps two months, while actively *discouraging* people > from fixing minor bugs

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 01:06:02PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. > > I am not deciding a

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

nzi Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attac

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > On Saturday 19 October 2002 13:54, Ian wrote: > > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > NO! > > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. > > We should do the release o

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 16:06, you wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 > > > > release. > > > > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. > > I am not deciding a

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

That is a rediculously conservative approach for any software, let-alone a beta product. It would virtually guarantee that we don't get a release for perhaps two months, while actively *discouraging* people from fixing minor bugs since that would further delay the release. Even Mozilla, with thei

[freenet-dev] What is going on with the Windows Installer

- Original Message - From: > Howdy! > > Here's an update. > I sent the following to Mathew Toseland in response to his asking me if I > was still having problems. > > I also found out something interesting. Since my 05pre5 node doesn't like > working on Win95 with JRE 1.3.1_04: > When I

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 03:42:39PM -0400, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. I am not deciding a release deadline based on PR concerns, I am deciding to have a releas

[freenet-dev] What is going on with the Windows Installer

Howdy! Here's an update. I sent the following to Mathew Toseland in response to his asking me if I was still having problems. I also found out something interesting. Since my 05pre5 node doesn't like working on Win95 with JRE 1.3.1_04: When I start Freenet (after the errors in the install) the t

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:44:35PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: > In ONE day??? Its going to take a week to get this done right. I would > suggest that we annouce rc1 on Wednesday, with the goal of releasing 0.5 > a week from then. This will also encourage freesite operators to update > their site

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Gianni Johansson wrote: > > Getting good PR coverage is essential, > Hyping freenet is a bad idea. When it works well people with tell other > people about it and the userbase will grow organically until journalists > start to call you. > > > as it will lead to wide > > d

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 02:44:35PM -0400, Ed Tomlinson wrote: <> > In ONE day??? Its going to take a week to get this done right. I would > suggest that we annouce rc1 on Wednesday, with the goal of releasing 0.5 > a week from then. This will also encourage freesite operators to update > their

Re: [freenet-dev] Metadata

On Saturday 19 October 2002 13:12, Oskar wrote: > I have no idea how fproxy will react to this (considering it's > cludginess level, probably badly), so somebody should test it. Don't hold anything back. Tell us how you really feel. ;-) I tested it briefly. It appears to be working. Froxy retur

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On Saturday 19 October 2002 13:54, Ian wrote: > > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. NO! We should not decide release deadlines based on PR concerns. We should do the release only after the code is stable. The only way to know the code is stable is to test

Re: [freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

On October 19, 2002 01:54 pm, Ian Clarke wrote: > For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. > > Getting good PR coverage is essential, as it will lead to wide > deployment and more donations with which we may be able to extend > Matthew's employment if he is intereste

Re: [freenet-dev] Metadata

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 12:41:21AM -0400, David Allen wrote: <> > Currently, the behavior of fred is to load the default document from a > mapfile when a nonexistant document name is requested. I.e. > SSK@Zk3lWHDM6VzA5k4nZWOq5xPl1rkPAgM/FreenetGallery/1//doesnt/exist.txt > returns the front page

Re: Interesting exception was [kaboom@hush.com: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero]

> On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: <> > > Oct 19, 2002 11:52:35 AM (freenet.node.Node, QThread-9): Error while receiving >message freenet.Message: ClientPut @cb2bc634b2ca4d6a in state New ClientPut @ >cb2bc634b2ca4d6a > > java.lang.IllegalAccessError: tried to access method >java.lan

[freenet-dev] Partial Solution to Winstaller problem

Just an addition to my message: when I copy the flaunch.ini from CVS over the one that comes with the new webinstaller, everything works fine. Are you doing a fresh installation or installing over an old one? I think the flaunch problem only occurs with fresh installations. --Reuben --- Reuben

Re: Interesting exception was [kaboom@hush.com: Re: [freenet-support]Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero]

I normally don't say this, but a 20meg file as a non-split file??? don't *do* that!!! :-p - fish On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: > java -cp .;freenet.jar freenet.client.cli.Main put --htl 0 --logLevel debug >SSK@U~EnjXOIJtX7lc0Qnpm~4rcwU5g/MonstertvT.mpg MonstertvT

[freenet-dev] Freenet streams

Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/04b055d1/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Partial Solution to Winstaller problem

Um...maybe I'm missing something, but the version of the windows installer script that I found in CVS is for 0.4. I'm looking in freenet/Contrib/wininstall/freenet.nsi. Where is the current version? --Reuben --- Mathew Ryden wrote: > - Original Message - > From: Reuben Balik > > > I n

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

lable URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/bbef5f3a/attachment.pgp>

Interesting exception was [kaboom@hush.com: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero]

- Forwarded message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Re: [freenet-dev] Divide by zero From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-BeenThere: [EMAIL PROTECTED] X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.12 Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] List-Help:

Re: [freenet-dev] Partial Solution to Winstaller problem

Just an addition to my message: when I copy the flaunch.ini from CVS over the one that comes with the new webinstaller, everything works fine. Are you doing a fresh installation or installing over an old one? I think the flaunch problem only occurs with fresh installations. --Reuben --- Reuben

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 08:57:50PM +1000, fish wrote: > > btw, i'm coding this up now anyhow. Are ogg streams acceptable to > > everyone, or should I go back to mp3? > > Shouldn't this be possible in a format independent way? the actual streaming proto

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 08:57:50PM +1000, fish wrote: > btw, i'm coding this up now anyhow. Are ogg streams acceptable to > everyone, or should I go back to mp3? Shouldn't this be possible in a format independent way? Ian. -- Ian Clarkeian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.

Re: [freenet-dev] Partial Solution to Winstaller problem

Um...maybe I'm missing something, but the version of the windows installer script that I found in CVS is for 0.4. I'm looking in freenet/Contrib/wininstall/freenet.nsi. Where is the current version? --Reuben --- Mathew Ryden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > - Original Message - > From: Reub

[freenet-dev] 0.5 release - Wednesday

For PR purposes, we need to decide which day we will do the 0.5 release. Getting good PR coverage is essential, as it will lead to wide deployment and more donations with which we may be able to extend Matthew's employment if he is interested in that. Journalists need to plan stories a couple of

Re: [freenet-dev] defaults

On Sat, 19 Oct 2002, Matthew Toseland wrote: > On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 06:15:28PM +1000, fish wrote: > > > > since the FEC default blocksize question came up, I thought I'd ask poeple > > waht the defaults should be for the following variables: > > > > - htl > 10 for insert, 15-25 for fetc

Re: [freenet-dev] defaults

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 06:15:28PM +1000, fish wrote: > > since the FEC default blocksize question came up, I thought I'd ask poeple > waht the defaults should be for the following variables: > > - htl 10 for insert, 15-25 for fetch. > - refresh time (in days) Huh? What are you asking

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Sat, Oct 19, 2002 at 08:57:50PM +1000, fish wrote: > > On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, r2q2 wrote: > > > I have an idea similar where also an SSK is used > > but DCHKs (dated content hash keys) are inserted by the streamer > > and the nodes retrieve each CHK in a series. Eventually the CHK's would >

Re: [freenet-dev] What is going on with the Windows Installer

- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Howdy! > > Here's an update. > I sent the following to Mathew Toseland in response to his asking me if I > was still having problems. > > I also found out something interesting. Since my 05pre5 node doesn't like > working on Win95 with JRE

Re: [freenet-dev] What is going on with the Windows Installer

Howdy! Here's an update. I sent the following to Mathew Toseland in response to his asking me if I was still having problems. I also found out something interesting. Since my 05pre5 node doesn't like working on Win95 with JRE 1.3.1_04: When I start Freenet (after the errors in the install) the t

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

http://www.dspaudio.com/~jaymz/freenet-mp3-stream-v2-test2.tar.gz this test is for linux people only (the stuff will work on windows with a little massaging, but there are no exe's and no canned configs), and needs python 2.2. This is just for testing. If you guys actully do anything with this,

Re: [freenet-dev] Freenet streams

On Fri, 18 Oct 2002, r2q2 wrote: > I have an idea similar where also an SSK is used > but DCHKs (dated content hash keys) are inserted by the streamer > and the nodes retrieve each CHK in a series. Eventually the CHK's would > expire on btw, i'm coding this up now anyhow. Are ogg streams a

[freenet-dev] splitfile block size

etproject.org/ -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20021019/8671b255/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Metadata

On Fri, Oct 18, 2002 at 05:10:02PM -0400, David Allen wrote: <> > Looking at this another way, I've looked at some of the code for > fproxy, and I know that a change there isn't appropriate. > GetRequestProcess.java seems to be the place to change it, but if this > isn't correct, then what is the

  1   2   >