* Edgar Friendly <thelema314 at gmail.com> [2008-07-02 19:46:34]: > Florent Daigni?re wrote: > > I have no problem with you (or anybody else) using the tools they want. > > I just don't want brazillion of incompatible/forked clients to spawn up > > in the wild and to connect to the main network. > > Reflecting on this idea, I think it'd be good (in the long run) if this > did happen. Of course the network would get disrupted, but I thought > that the idea of Freenet was to have a disruption-resistant network. > And a brazillion forks means many new developers trying changes. If the > project doesn't reject their changes, they would become a great force > for building a better Fred. > > OTOH, without DSCM, forked clients will still exist, it'll just be > tougher to keep them up to date and to merge any improvements back to > the official client. > > $0.02 from an oldie, > > E.
Heh, I'm not against the idea here; I'm just being pragmatic: we don't have the resources to deal with forked clients. NextGen$ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080703/21a25ac9/attachment.pgp>
