On Monday 11 October 2010 23:16:48 Ximin Luo wrote:
> On 06/10/10 13:08, Todd Walton wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Volodya <[email protected]> 
> > wrote:
> >> Freenet is in active development.
> > 
> > The good old standby argument.
> > 
> >> Stability is good, but would you rather have a buggy insecure node?
> > 
> > So, Freenet is buggy and insecure?  I understood that it was caveat
> > emptor, but being so buggy and insecure that a fix can't wait a mere
> > two weeks or so is something else entirely.
> > 
> 
> (I meant to reply to this much earlier, forgot, sorry.)
> 
> I agree, the "in-development" argument shouldn't be used as an excuse, and 
> it's
> wrong to use it as an excuse. Frequently *forced* updates are a *bad* thing 
> and
> we should aim to reduce them.
> 
> The reason for the "forced" updates is *protocol changes*, due to freenet 
> being
> a distributed network. This means that newer nodes won't talk to, or will have
> trouble talking to, older nodes. This is what's unavoidable and "forces" an
> update - we don't directly force people to update; you can turn auto-update 
> off.
> 
> I don't know exactly how Matthew chooses when to make a particular build
> mandatory, but I'd guess it would be based on a subjective judgement of when 
> to
> force all nodes to switch to the new protocol, rather than have parts of the
> network talking different languages.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that fixes to buggy/insecure code don't *force* updates (at
> least, we shouldn't do this - no other project forces updates, even for
> security reasons).

Why is it bad to make e.g. a content filter vulnerability mandatory? It looks 
legitimate to me...
> 
> The changelogs don't actually explain this. I guess it would be best to 
> explain
> exactly why a build is being made mandatory, such as highlighting the
> particular protocol change that's triggering it.

Fair enough, I just assume it is obvious when I am making a bunch of core 
changes, but maybe I need to explain more.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to