On Tue, May 08, 2001 at 01:15:44PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > > Appending the metadata key to the CHK strikes me as an inelegant > > solution to a non-problem. > > It has already been generally agreed that there are two problems which > have to be solved. Only one solution to these two problems has been > suggested, which is taking metadata out of CHKs. So unless you have a more > elegant solution to the same two problems then its elegance is not a valid
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Mr.Bad
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Tavin Cole
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Ian Clarke
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Tavin Cole
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... da...@aminal.com
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Ian Clarke
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Ian Clarke
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... toad
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... da...@aminal.com
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Ian Clarke
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Oskar Sandberg
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... da...@aminal.com
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metada... da...@aminal.com
- [freenet-devl] no client metadata in 0.4 CHKs? Brandon
- [freenet-devl] no client metadata in 0.4 CHKs? Ian Clarke
- [freenet-devl] no client metadata in 0.4 CHKs? Adam Langley