> From: "Scott G. Miller" <scgmille at freenetproject.org> > > >> What??!??! > >> User-friendliness is "not really appropriate for our goals of freedom of > >> information" ??!? > >Of course user friendliness is. Being exactly like > >Joe-Poorly-Designed-Filesharing-Network isn't. > > Point taken. Sorry for the misunderstanding. > > Anyway, Sebastian's new installer, and the new gui configurator announced > earlier today, should hopefully create a brain-dead-easy foundation for a > truly user-friendly freenet on windows. > > All we need now is an arsenal of kickass freenet client apps. > > Status of traditional internet applications, and their implementation (or > lack thereof) over Freenet: > > 1) Web browsing - now working well :) > > 2) Email - nothing yet - apps urgently needed - either dedicated freenet > f-mail application, or (preferably) POP/SMTP servers to support any email > client in the way that fproxy/fcpproxy supports any web browser. This would > be best if it uses openPGP libraries, and supports automatic key exchange, > even runs a central in-freenet PK service. > > 3) Chat - nothing yet - value of this could be questionable because of rate > of key insertions required, and their effect on Freenet > > 4) Usenet - the FMB beta client is an excellent start - it needs to support > n 'newsgroups' instead of just one.
These last three things were being done by the EOF project, but I never much liked the implementation of them. The e-mail and usenet were implemented using servlets (ick), and chat--as you said--is of questionable value (but EOF has a history of doing crazy stuff, so we'll probably do it anyway). Of the three, usenet is probably the best idea. BTW--EOF is now becoming a standards body for implementing other Internet protocols over Freenet. Code coming out of the project, if any, will consist of referance distributions. > > 5) File-sharing - while the Napster and Gnutella protocols as they stand are > totally impossible within Freenet, many concepts can be borrowed and adapted > into a scheme well-suited to Freenet, and front-ended with a specialised > Freenet client. Search functionality is also very possible - some of FMB's > architectural concepts could be borrowed for this (provided that FMB isn't > filed under a software patent (...just kidding!)). While no centralization should be put into Freenet itself, no one can stop a client writer from putting centralization in their client if they so choose. I would probably build a Freenet file sharing system using Freegle as a front-end. > > 6) FTP - not supported yet - repositories of downloadable media files are > presently implemented as a loose network of inter-linked freesites - scope > exists for a freenet client to be implemented as a localhost FTP server, > which inserts files that are picked up by an anonymous master server, which > re-inserts these files under a master tree. Enumerated keys instead of > date-based SSKs. Through using SSK public or private keys under the root, > the FTP server can support the FTP client in inserting and requesting keys. Some months ago, someone on the EOF lists mentioned that they were working on a FTP-Freenet client. I think he got it working, too. > > 7) CVS - nothing done yet, however the idea aroused interesting discussion > on #freenet recently, where developers rated the idea as viable. > > Cheers > David > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl > ----------------------------------------------- Runbox Mail Manager - www.runbox.com Online email application _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
