On Wed, Feb 05, 2003 at 10:26:35PM -0800, AARG!Anonymous wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] scriveva:
> 
> > >> is happy to run on build 552; it is slow because run on a
> > >>  slow system; the memory profile and resource use of kaffe
> > >>  is far better respect sun jre.
> > >> Take care of this compatibility; IMHO is more important
> > >>  then that the mean Freenet developer think.
> > >
> > >It crashes in minutes on my machine. The developers have been somewhat
> > >nonresponsive, the bugs seem to be deep magick and the Project Leaders
> > >have determined that we don't need to spend money making Kaffe work with
> > >Freenet.
> > 
> > This statement is very important; IMHO the Freenet Project 
> >  need an explicit position on that question.
> > 
> > Project Leaders, can we hear you ?
> > 
> > Releasing the main code under GPL is ineffective, if the
> >  .jar need proprietary software; in my understanding
> >  the use of the GPL licence is incorrect; I think in
> >  this case LGPL is the right type of licence.
> > 
> > Anyway, till Freenet remains in java, dropping the Kaffe
> >  compatibility IMHO is a fundamental mistake, both from
> >  the point of view of free software and from the security.
> > 
> > The only other way to solve this problem is IMU, to 
> >  release a C (or other freely compilable/runnable language)
> >  version
> 
> Totally agree with Marco: this shows my old sensation, Freenet is a good
> project but not its developer group :-(
Yeah yeah whatever. We can release a C version, but that means no new
features, no significant bugfixes and no speed improvements for a year.
And we need you to fund me to the tune of $1,250/month for all that
time. And finally it would be much easier to go to C++ and it would run
on almost as many platforms. A year is probably an underestimate for C,
since it'd have to be pretty much a complete reimplementation.

-- 
Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED]
Full time freenet hacker.
http://freenetproject.org/
Freenet Distribution Node (temporary) at
ICTHUS.

Attachment: msg02823/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to