[freenet-dev] [GSoC 2011] Idea : Porting to Apache Struts

> Java 6 ships with a web server: >com.sun.net.httpserver > > for this, but, again, it's still a lot to take on, given that the needs are > modest. > > > IMO, best to keep the content separate from mechanics... All content files > (HTML/JavaScript) > should be editable using HTML editing tools

[freenet-dev] One possibility to make Freetalk anonymous

xactly is *wrong* with using pseudonymous identities? I'm not really seeing the use-case for single-post identities. Ian. -- Ian Clarke Personal blog: http://blog.locut.us/ -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org

Re: [freenet-dev] One possibility to make Freetalk anonymous

On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:59 PM, Volodya wrote: > > You're tilting at windmills. > > I assume this is some sort of dismissal. I haven't heard this phrase > before. Oh > well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tilting_at_windmills Perhaps if you could explain what exactly is *wrong* with using pseu

[freenet-dev] One possibility to make Freetalk anonymous

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/11/2011 07:46 AM, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 10:16 PM, Volodya > wrote: > > Pseudonymity is a feature when a user wants that. And it is a bug when > one wants > something else.

[freenet-dev] One possibility to make Freetalk anonymous

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/11/2011 02:00 AM, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Sun, Apr 10, 2011 at 3:57 AM, Volodya > wrote: > > Currently Freetalk is only pseudonymous, which is probably the main > reason why > many people will f

Re: [freenet-dev] [GSoC 2011] Idea : Porting to Apache Struts

> Java 6 ships with a web server: >com.sun.net.httpserver > > for this, but, again, it's still a lot to take on, given that the needs are > modest. > > > IMO, best to keep the content separate from mechanics... All content files > (HTML/JavaScript) > should be editable using HTML editing tools