>> > As FROST[-WOT]'s protocol is proprietary the author >> > of this document has designed the FRUIT protocol. >> >> Whoa. WTF? >> >> Frost's protocol is proprietary? > >Frost is open source, but the code isn't very pleasant to look at. However, it >looks like FRUIT will be better featured in any case.
as filesharing is becoming more important within freenet but freenet is not exactly targetted at filesharing it would make sense to define a way to request a file which is currently not present within the freenet so it becomes uploaded by the content provider. frost already does this, but as frost's requesting scheme seems to be for use between different instances of frost only that's a substancial drawback. FRUIT is a protocol specification with two mail goals: be application independent and be able to indicate this upload requestion in a standardized way while providing informations enabling the client to decide if it wants the file or not (try to prevent uploads when the data will get thrown away later) ---~~--- after saying again what you already know, would you think there is something missing or plain wrong with the current FRUIT spec? i'd like to push FRUIT into a stable state. i'd also like to hear if you think if FRUIT is easy to implement for client application coders as i hope it will eventually get implemented in some user programs, or if there could be adjusted something ...attached is a slightly revised and up-to-date spec (alpha2) with some typos fixed, MD5 fields, more notes, etc... thank you vey much! and have a nice sunday...
fruitspec_alpha2.zip
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
