![]() |
|
Register | FAQ | The Twelve Commandments | Members List | Calendar | Arcade | Find the Best VPN | Today's Posts | Search |
General Gnutella Development Discussion For general discussion about Gnutella development. |
| LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| ||||
![]() Hi, I come with an appology and a goodbye. First I would like to apology for my behaviour of crying out my fears instead of searching for a diplomatic conversation. Sorry, my post/email was a "cryout" of some upcoming problems and collected opinions from the gnutella development community. It's also a "goodbye" because I withdraw dissapointed from Gnutella development. Your answers (those from other developers) did confirm my feelings. Well, my very personal point of view is that current Gnutella development has a lack of documentation and structures attracting more coders and network/protocol specialists. As a matter of fact development is slow, chaotic for newcomers. In the past I tried to help and work out solutions. But I see less improvement and I'm not willing to spend my time anymore while vendors (BS and perhaps also LW) turning Gnutella into a single/few vendors network where servents and decisions are not equal and not for the sake of a common community. For example, clumping together clients of a single vendor and infecting hundreds and thousands of newbie users with persistant spyware ... that's not my idea of Gnutella! Actually I don't want you to stop to cooperate with BS/LW. I wanted to wake up some developers and make them think about how things are done today and if you are satisfied? What I don't want is to hold you back from productivity, improvememts and working together on Gnutella. To be fair, LW does contribute valueable ideas and papers, yeah! I can speak only about me, I do not feel comfortable how things are done generally, e.g. the take-this-or-die behaviour. But it seems on the GDF everyone is pretty lucky whith each other. Are you suprised if more ppl do not want to be part of the GDF? I would like to suggest to work on a well defined protocol documentation (RFC), free of proprietray interests. Market shares and marketing should not be allowed to influence an open protocol design, because such descisions are contraproductive in a long term. It would be great to see in a few months Gnutella having superpeers, dynamic traffic routing, hashs, metadata, chat and (friendly) anti-freeloading behaviour. FastTrack and eDonkey are still a great source of inspiration IMHO. However, thx for the fun and the possibility of learning about P2P. Greets and good luck with your work, Moak PS: If someone would like to communicate about alternatives, how about meeting on friday afternoon/night (23:00 GMT/UTC, 17:00 CST) on IRC #gnutelladev on IRCnet? A description is available on http://www.gnutellaforums.com and usually some known faces are arround. |
| |
![]() | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Resources for Gnutella Developers | arne_bab | General Gnutella Development Discussion | 1 | May 15th, 2020 07:11 PM |
General Gnutella API | Hamtavs | General Gnutella Development Discussion | 9 | August 1st, 2009 09:40 AM |
What posts belong in this General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion section! | Lord of the Rings | General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion | 0 | November 17th, 2005 05:54 AM |
Should Gnutella developers work on measures to achieve anonymity on Gnutella? | Joakim Agren | General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion | 23 | August 27th, 2003 08:18 AM |
Warning to Gnutella developers: Design a system of anonymity or Gnutella is doomed | Unregistered | General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion | 16 | June 28th, 2002 06:54 AM |