On Mon, Jan 14, 2002 at 02:59:40PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote: > On Monday 14 January 2002 13:56, you wrote: <> > There is no reason to spuriously fail, when you could easily create the KSK > redirect to the existing CHK.
BFD. So the interface is not perfect and the client behavior isn't always intuitive. I knew that already, and I have never claimed that Fred is perfect or finished. The whole network is broken, for fucks sake - I find that somewhat more relevant ATM then whether the client returns the right exit codes. <> > > You submitted those, you could just as well have taken it up here... > > I have. My original implementation of FCPClient had reasonable cancel() > semantics and didn't write to buckets after cancel, but Tavin backed it out > and changed the Client interface so that it is impossible to know when > resources used by a request are released after cancel(). I got shouted down > in the resulting debate. Though the issues were never resolved. Jesus, somebody got up on the wrong side of bed this morning. We were discussing whether the bugs on sf were relevant, not implementation issues or whether Tavin broke your code... -- Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
