On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 07:20:02PM +1200, David McNab wrote:
> I was willing to put up with FProxy up till now, and passively accept it as
> the 'Official Freenet HTTP Interface'.
<snip catalog of ways in which fproxy sucks>
> I suggest that a strategic decision be made to switch to native binary
> implementations of FProxy.
> On Windows, no problem. Ditto for Mac, since binaries are completely
> portable across installations of the same class of OS.
> On Linux, might require a 'make'. But so totally worth it.
It's no secret that fproxy is crap. And no one has anything against
alternative implementations, native executables or otherwise. But all
of the problems you mentioned could be solved by rewriting fproxy so
that it is not a piece of crap. This really needs to be done for the
0.4 node. The framework is almost all there -- AutoClient needs to
be finished. The new plug-in API is there. It's an open job..
> Freenet still has a lingering reputation for requiring its users to be
> developers with crypto skills, or at least patient and persistent
> power-users.
I suppose it requires above average intelligence to get Fred to run,
but not that far above average. Not like Lake Wobegone children
above average.
> Overcoming issues like these will go far towards shaking off this bad rep.
Bad rap?
--
# tavin cole
#
# "Technology is a way of organizing the universe so that
# man doesn't have to experience it."
#
# - Max Frisch
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
