On Tue, Dec 02, 2003 at 03:30:39AM -0500, Robert Soros wrote: > Take this suggestion for what its worth (as my opinion currently holds > none in this conversation.) Don't make any release with the current > stable build, nor any NGR build for that matter. In my humble opinion > this would be the single biggest mistake the project could possibly > make. Ian, You often make reference to the experience a first time user > has with freenet. I concur and would hope others reading this thread > will understand how valuable their first impression of freenet can be to > the project. > > The reality is the current stable build is, *cough* most likely on par > with ngr's performance and reliability in delivering content to the > user. I've used both quite a bit and for the life of me I cant find > any difference between the two. > > There have been a number of people reporting success with the current > stable network, unfortunately this wonderful sensation likely only lasts > for about an hour. I'll make mention that the original author of this > thread spent some time tonight on IRC describing the pains he was having > trying to relieve the monumental load placed on his node with no success > as far as I could tell. > > If any person on this list does not believe me.. I would suggest getting > yourself on stable and letting your node run for a few hours > (pleeeeeeeeease dont get on here and tell me how great your node is > running after 15 minutes and 300 queries) The proof is in the pudding > and unfortunately I have the pudding sitting right in front of me. I > would be more than happy to be proven wrong. > > I'm dreaming that there are no load problems? Content retrieval is next > to impossible? Wish I were wrong about those two but I'm not. > > My suggestion. Rebrand one of the "golden age" builds (ie. > pre-pcache/nio) as the "New and Improved Freenet"... release that to the > public, make $$$, and continue work on ngr. > > Ignore all of this if there's some master to plan to fix all of the load > and retrieval problems before the imminent release... Dont let this > mistake happen for the sake of the projects future.
There are tons of ideas for fixing them. It's a matter of whether any of them work. I have heard fairly mixed reports on the new stable - scum says it's crap especially for inserts, but routingSuccessRatio is higher. For example. > > Shalom, > Robert. > > On Sun, 2003-11-30 at 19:18, Ian Clarke wrote: > > Zlatin Balevsky wrote: > > > I still think its a good idea to invest some toadtime into polishing it > > > > That is good news, and yes - I suspect there are a few things that need > > to be tidied up (for example, didn't someone mention that acquisition of > > new refs was borked?). > > > > Ideal scenario is to get 0.5.3 working nicely (perhaps releasing > > 0.5.3rc1 in a week), release it, get $$$, and then start figuring out > > what is wrong with NGR using a careful scientific process rather than > > the somewhat haphazard approach we have been taking. > > > > Ian. -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
