On Sunday 22 November 2009 16:51:10 sashee wrote: > Hello folks > > I've been busy with my final thesis as you've probably noticed and > couldn't make progress to fix and stabilize the web-pushing > functionality. The #1 problem with it is that it has became a > maintenance nightmare to keep the branch up-to-date. Every few change > makes conflicts and after some time it takes nearly hours to fix all > of them, and it is really error-prone. After a few weeks, I've started > to fix bugs, just to found out I can't even connect to other peers, > saying they are too new. It makes development very hard, and full of > non-related tasks. > > One of the cornerstone of the development was that all functionality > must work as of now when javascript is disabled, so this whole > web-pushing is an optional feature. Imo the course to take is to test > throughly that it works fully with web-pushing disabled and merge it > back to the master and the development can resume on that branch > without the burden of constantly keeping it up-to-date with the > ever-increasing difference from the master. Users may not notice > anything, and when it is finally ready, it can be enabled with a > single commit to everybody.
Hmmm, not a bad idea, but would it disable the existing page loading javascript? Granted that only works on firefox, and we prefer Chrome if possible on Windows... > > About it's current status: > - I'm pretty sure that the client side code is stable, both event > receiving and processing, and connection sharing-vise. > - The server side has some bugs that causes stallings and exceptions, > and they are hard to discover and fix. Most of the remaining work is > to fix them. > - There are some architectural flaws that may cause events to be lost, > although they are not hard to fix. Ok... > > The XHTML support is still broke, and most likely will be in the > future, as folks at GWT thinks it is low priority ( > http://code.google.com/p/google-web-toolkit/issues/detail?id=710 ). As > the XHTML standard is considered low-priority at W3C in favor to > HTML5, I think treating XHTML as HTML(as of now) won't break sites, > and GWT is happy too. Yeah, I am happy with ignoring the XHTML MIME type issue for now... > > Thoughts welcome > > sashee
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
