On 31 Aug 2005, at 16:16, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Would you please explain what the practical difference is between the
following:
1. Put everything in FCP. Including queueing and big FEC downloads.
Binary metadata, hierarchical metadata, etc, dealt with by the node.
Third party clients interface to this. Clients can range from very
simple (but still able to download any size file) to very complex.
2. All of the above plus:
- Fproxy can queue a file, so the user doesn't have to copy a link
from
the page into a separate application just to download a file
posted on
a web site. Or are you saying that files shouldn't be posted on web
sites??? THAT I strongly object to.
- Fproxy offers a minimal status interface to show the current
status of
the global queue.
I have never argued that FProxy shouldn't provide status
information. Other than that, the main difference between 1 and 2 is
that 1 is less work, while providing all the functionality the vast
majority of our users are likely to want in practice, and without
wasting time on "white elephant" functionality that is cumbersome to
implement, and which doesn't work well.
Ian.
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
