Hope the new feature auto-update will be soon present :)

Evan Daniel <evanbd at gmail.com> a ?crit : There have been several recent 
mandatory upgrades that introduce
backoff-related bugfixes.

I'm curious if it wouldn't be better for network health to have the
build n make build n-1 mandatory instead.  The reason would be that it
seems likely to be bad for network health to be repeatedly severing
the network into two separate pieces and slowly migrating nodes across
the boundary -- the old set of locations and data stores assumed the
old set of connections was in place.

I realize this leaves buggy builds on the network longer, causing
problems.  However, if a sufficiently large fraction of the network
upgrades quickly (which it would seem they do, since self-mandatory
builds seem to work at least a bit), then that shouldn't persist more
than a little bit.

Mostly it just seems odd to me that upgrading to the new build comes
at a penalty of having my node be on a very small network for the
first day or two after the upgrade, particularly when upgrades come
every day or two.

Thanks, and good luck with the bug hunting :)

Evan Daniel
_______________________________________________
Tech mailing list
Tech at freenetproject.org
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech



---------------------------------
 Yahoo! Mail r?invente le mail ! D?couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail et son 
interface r?volutionnaire.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060531/49803aab/attachment.html>

Reply via email to