On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 5:26 PM, Florent Daigniere < nextgens at freenetproject.org> wrote:
> Different codebase Same language, many architectural similarities (use of small-world routing, UDP messaging, UDP-hole-punching, etc) > arguably no active developpement (7months since last commit? - > https://github.com/sanity/tahrir/commits/master), no release yet, no > userbase, ... Exactly why I want to get someone to work on it! > different goals > Different non-competitive approaches to achieving the same broad goal. > I am not sure it's a good fit for GSoC tbh... but then again, it's up to > Google to judge that. > I don't see why not, with appropriate mentorship, which I'm willing to provide, I think it could be a great way for a student to learn about P2P architectures, and without having to learn a vast codebase. They'd get involved early enough that they could make a real difference, that is a feature, not a bug. > Why do you think Freenet would be the right umbrella? Because it has a 501c3 and has a good track-record with GSoC. > Is there any integration in between both planned on the roadmap? > None planned, but it's possible. > Why not presenting it as a mentoring organization on its own? Because it would be a lot more work, with no advantage I can think of. What is the disadvantage of doing it under the Freenet umbrella? Ian. -- Ian Clarke Personal blog: http://blog.locut.us/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20120217/9ba67263/attachment.html>
