When should a Gnutella Developer be called a Developer?
 

A lot of people want-to-be part of a particular group, it's a status or a belonging thing.
So it's understandable human nature.
Being called a "Gnutella Developer" carries a certian status and respect that is only deserved to those who have done the actual work, in my opinion.
My question is:

If someone talked about making a client, but hasn't ever produced a actual working Gnutella client, would you be able to call them a Gnutella Developer?

On the other hand, if someone had a "pre-release-alpha-testing" version that worked even a little but was never improved, I think that would qualify developer status. Where do you draw the line?

Talk is cheap, writing good working code is hard.
I am just wondering what other people think about this.

Yeah thats true,
I noticed that on gnutella.com.
Those people there were talking about major changes
and improvements for Gnutella but they were just talking.

"Hey, I'm programming a better Gnutella."
Blablablah.

You cant write programs with talking.
Do it and then let the public know about it.

(Lynn Cache is not talking -> http://www.zero-g.net/gwebcache/ )

My Definition
 

I define someone as a Gnutella developer if they have a knowledge of a programming language, and they have successfully written or modified a Gnutella servent, recompiled it, and got it working.

This is rather broad - it includes tinkerers who only change a few lines of an open source servent.

e.g. I am NOT a gnutella developer :)

Kath,
I think this question is quite legitimated.
I mean its not really insulting and he didnt use
any bad language.

I think if we gonna move all posts which arent
quite On-Topic into the TrashCan the forum gets
quite empty.

Well,
Why dont we start another vote whether
to force a registration? For me it sounded like everybody
voted for it.

Laughing...

I AM A DEVELOPER

I betcha he was referring to me :D

... But to be fair, here's a response to where I see when someone can be called "Gnutella Developer" or not.

There are a number of people that have written Gnutella clients, but never released it. Think about students that needed a Gnutella client for a school paper, or those who just want their custom built client for whatever purpose. Those, IMO are developers too.

Then there are those who don't have their own Gnutella client, but do help a bit with some development of an Gnutella client. Say, those who are working on LimeWire or Gnucleus' open source versions. They may just be doing the GUI, an "about box", or a little bit of the internal code. And those are developers too.

And then there are those who work on the protocol itself, but don't have their own client or are actively working on somene else's. They provide documentation for Gnutella, propose new features with pseudo code (etc). Those I call developers too. An example would be Gordon Mohr of Bitzi - he doesn't have his own Gnutella client, but he has put in a tremendous effort to get the HUGE proposal going - and most others that do have a client, are actually implementing that. This particular "developer" isn't a "developer" in the deepest sense. But they *do* develop Gnutella, just in a way we usually don't associate "developing" with a protocol or application.

As for me, as you know, my client hasn't been released yet. I do develop one, but just isn't available for many others to play around with. Does that mean I can't cary the "developer title" - in my opinion I can, but that's up to you I guess. But I've also participated in a number of proposals (such as the common X-Try header, the proposed queue, the proposed connect-back [which is implemented in another client too] and a few other smaller things), and I am helping putting the Gnutella RFC together so it can be submitted to the IETF so it will be a true public-domain protocol (which has many benefits for Gnutella developers).

That's where I would draw the line. "Developer" is a very broad word.

O.K. There we go, thank you!
Those above things do qualify you as a Gnutella Developer in my opinion. I apologize for not taking into consideration those other things you have done.
I still think that until someone releases a client, it's not fair to say, post or represent themself as a Gnutella Client Developer. Meaning they shouldn't be able to vote for standards, or "pull their weight" saying they won't add this or that feature, like it will hurt their non-existant user base or something.
And no, this isn't totally directed at cultiv8r, there are some others who are stepping over the line lately, if there is a line that is.

And anon posting allows people to shake out the bugs in Gnutella, the total picture of Gnutella, the "community", including the politics and "personal" problems.
I have presented some of the more tough subjects that "registered" users wouldn't touch for fear of looking "stupid" or saving face. Whistle blowing is a good example too, when some client is doing bad things to the network.
It can get annoying at times, but it's worth it, and that's why we have moderators who can edit/delete.
I just wish they would delete a little less, and when being directly "challenged", leave the editing up to a different moderator who is not emotionally invloved.
Even moderators need to be kept in check now and then.

I agree to requiring registration myself.. bet there's a pattern with the ip's of these unreggies that do insult [although this thread makes a legitimate point if you ask me]