> the trouble is, we don't have interoperability with 0.2 either!  If 
> some people are using a non-encrypting 0.2 release and other people
> are using an encrypting snapshot, there is going to be a big mess
> when their nodes try to talk to each other.  (Probably there is
> already.)
> 
> We definitely have to have two separate Freenet networks if we are
> going to be breaking protocol compatibility for extended periods of
> time, and make sure that references from one don't "leak" into the
> other.  To emphasize the separation, how about this: make the
> "snapshot" network use a different port by default.  Then it would
> be easy for people to run both an 0.2 release and a snapshot on 
> their machine at the same time, if they were so inclined, and it
> would be easy to tell which was which.
> 
Oh I totally agree.  That and having two inform scripts, and we're fine.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20000522/2a8069b0/attachment.pgp>

Reply via email to