* Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> [2006-10-16 09:26:59]: > > On 16 Oct 2006, at 02:29, Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote: > > >* Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> [2006-10-15 21:37:35]: > > > >> > >>On 15 Oct 2006, at 16:14, Florent Daigni?re (NextGen$) wrote: > >> > >>>* Dave Baker <dbkr at freenetproject.org> [2006-10-15 20:57:57]: > >>> > >>>>On Saturday 14 October 2006 12:57, nextgens at freenetproject.org > >>>>wrote: > >>>>>Author: nextgens > >>>>>Date: 2006-10-14 11:57:08 +0000 (Sat, 14 Oct 2006) > >>>>>New Revision: 10661 > >>>>> > >>>>>Modified: > >>>>> trunk/freenet/src/freenet/clients/http/ > >>>>>DarknetConnectionsToadlet.java > >>>>>Log: > >>>>>Small hack on fproxy to deny node removal if there isn't one > >>>>>week of > >>>>inactivity. > >>>> > >>>>Is there a particular reason for this? Surely if a user is > >>>>removing an active > >>>>node, they're doing it for a reason. This strikes me as very > >>>>patronising. > >>> > >>>Fighting against network churn... I'm not sure a big warning > >>>would be > >>>efficient enough :| > >>> > >>>Maybe I should even do a step forward : remove the "disable" > >>>feature and let only BurstOnly and ListenOnly. > >> > >>This isn't a good idea, I agree with Dave Baker, it is patronizing, > >>and reminiscent of the kind of attitude that leads to things like > >>DRM. If a user decides that they want to remove a connection, it > >>isn't our business to tell them they can't. > >> > >>Anyway, connection churn is much more likely to be due to nodes going > >>up and then going down permanently, than people removing peers > >>prematurely. > >> > >>If I could state a general principal here, remember that our software > >>is just a guest on the user's computer. If they tell it to do > >>something, it should do it. We have no business second guessing > >>users. > >> > >>Ian. > >> > >>Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. > >>phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog > >> > > > >Ok, so I'll revert it, but may I add a confirmation step with a > >discouraging warning insteed ? > > How about using color coding? Make connections that haven't been > active for over a week red, make other ones a less concerning black - > or something like that. > > Ian.
It's already like that... connections that haven't been active for over a week are already displayed in red. In fact, I would like to stop people from removing connections, not encourage them to do so ;) -- NextGen$. "On peut ob??r aux lois en souhaitant qu'elles changent, comme on sert ? la guerre en souhaitant la paix." Merleau Ponty - L'?loge de la philosophie -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20061016/3d7b9306/attachment.pgp>
