bbackde at googlemail.com a ?crit : > 2008/3/4 Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org>: >> On Tuesday 04 March 2008 18:04, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: >> > In the current discussions I miss one thing. Everyone wants to start >> > his own thingy. >> > It would be much more effective if all interested parties get >> > together, decide about a design >> > and then implement it _together_! SomeDude wrote fms and got some >> > experience with the >> > web of trust, now we start a WoT from scratch. Seagull already has a >> > working (not completed) >> > version of FMS in Java, but we start something different? >> >> It would be great to see some code! >> > > Ack! I am in contact with seagull, I hope we see the code in some SVN soon. > >> > Is the FMS port unneeded then? Or should WoT and FMS be competitors? >> > >> > No offense, I just wanted to read your thinkings about this :) >> > >> > I also experienced this with Frost: I am the only true Frost developer >> > for a long time now, >> > and again and again someone came up with its own new tools. I love >> > competition, but >> > as you all know there is alot to do in Frost, and we would have made a >> > much better tool >> > for all users if we would have worked together on Frost. >> >> Well, with FMS, hopefully there will only be one implementation for the >> foreseeable future. I get the impression batosai is getting impatient >> though. >> I would be if I wasn't barred from working on it. :) > > I understand, really. But Julien, do you really want to start with a > new WoT design instead > of using something which currently works (fms)? We have the C code for > this implementation, > and its Java port also (soon). Do you think current fms isn't the right thing?
I've got no problem with FMS and I personnally think that it is the way to go. But I don't think the WoT feature should be a part of it. As I explained before, most of Freenet features will, sooner or later, need a WoT. Making it a plugin accessible through FCP will save some time for other developpments. And all client apps could benefit of a common WoT : if an identity is a valuable contributor to discussion boards, there is a good chance that the files he shares are valuable too. Of course I will re-use a lot of the existing code (why re-invent the wheel). My idea is just to get the WoT feature out of client apps. @Toad : You're right. I'm impatient ;) I'm finally learning Java, and seeking for an idea that could help the project. Maybe I'm wasting my time with that idea of independant plugin and should help FMS' java porter to make his WoT accessible to other apps ? What is your opinion about what I should start with ? If your answer is my original idea of a filesharing tool, note that I'll need a WoT ;) -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 252 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080304/467c3751/attachment.pgp>
