While "Morph devs" were playing golf being paid, John Marshall was working for free, as he did update his gnucDNA to 1.1.0.8.

Here is the changelog:
_
GnucDNA 1.1.0.8

swabby: X-Try headers always parsed during handshake
swabby: Newer hosts to cache attempted first for connections
swabby: Put a max on alt hosts that will be used from one source
hosts
swabby: Fixed outbound ttl for queryhits not being set correctly
swabby: ID3-less hashing turned on by default
swabby: Limited amount of hosts from a single subnet
swabby: X-Alt hosts must be verified first before adding to mesh
swabby: X-Nalt suppport added
swabby: Banned openext

I wonder if the bold statement was the cause to the no results from GnucDNAs...

John Marshall is not working entirely for free.

Who pays him?

Morgwen

I know last year Morpheus paid him so they can release Morpheus 3.0, but now....??? I think trap_jaw is speculating :p Maybe t_j was talking about the paid job John probably got if he finished university...

Well I'm not in the know this time :D

that's what I was referring to.

You continue to talk out of assumptions ( or ignorance). And no, the line you bolded isnt the reason nor was there one -- gnucDNA clients do return queries.
What you referenced is that TTL's were being sent out higher than they should be, but the node receiving it just reset it and so has no adverse effect.

These changes are picked up and updating soon in an already scheduled release. The 'X-Nalt' support was added to appease LW by swabby, but yea... get them to ban us ;-)

You can continue to assume that the gnutella implementation is "bad", but until we get back direct responses from the REAL LW's devs that they share your negative opinions, than it's all hot air you're posting. As Morpheus users slowly upgrade and the less 'old' Ultrapeers remain.... the difference is seen.

There are really differences being made but lets just look at the negative, it's good for boosting your post count. ;-)

et voila: i accidently posted as kayaman2 and when deleting it , deleted your response. OOPS!
don't expect a response, it's already noted everything you say is to take jabs at either a) morpheus b) gnucDNA, c ) morph devs know nothing ( Yawn, get a new one or show us applications you have built?) and d) all of the above.

Now delete my post again and your in trouble man. I rewrote my post and I'm saving it on my harddrive.

You seem on par with my ignorance on GnucDNA, Kayaman :rolleyes:

Why don't you disable gnutella support just like you did for G2? The G2 support in GnucDNA is more healthly for that network than the gnutella support for the Gnet is. I know that you wrote your NeoNet DHT over GnucDNA so you don't have to write a full P2P app as it would be too difficult for you. You probalby use GnucDNA to dl , upload exchange sources etc... That does NOT mean however that you have to force your users to use Gnutella and leech from us.

Hope my point is taken,
Morpheus is a looser on all the line :rolleyes:

Edit: well at least you apologized for deleting my post.
Edit2: I really don't have anything against GnucDNA used in hobby P2P apps, new developers have to come from somewhere. John Marshall is a great dev and GnucDNA is a great project for a one man work. I definitly recommend using Gnucleus to users instead of Morpheus. But I really have something against Morpheus, I'm not hiding that. And you are well deserving my bitching, sir.
Edit3: I love answer choices! I take the options a) Morph, c) Morph devs know nothing and a variant of b) GnucDNA (in morpheus we should add)

oh calm down, your ego...eeeerrr post count is intact. You saw for yourself i posted as an unregistered user. No hard feelings ;-)


"us"? LW isn't the only client on the network, Morpheus does share back, and lastly last I checked Gnutella was an open network -- not LimeNet.

My last point still stands, the gnutella implementation is better and will continue to be and it's absurd to think it's bad for the network when it's quite the contrary.
You post actual proof , with the LW's devs stamp of approval since you seem to try to speak for them of the how 'unhealthy' it is for the network on any sort of significant scale and you'll have a case.
LW is always making changes and i see mistakes made along the way... yet it seems the same standard isn't afforded to Morpheus when actually trying to make changes. Good look with whatever software you make so perfect ;-)

Look, us means legitimate Gnet clients! I'm probably the person that uses the most P2Ps here so while I know LW the most you are totally wrong. Us means Bearshares, Limewires, Gtk-gnutella, Phex, Swapper, Gnucleus(!!!) and even Shareaza. Us means people understanding Gnet and having their own implementation, not one stolen, borrowed or whatever you call what you have done. If at least you were open source I could understand the use of GnucDNA, but until then...

Mistakes are human, but at a certain number they reveal incompetence, Morph reached that level since version 2. While I admit that I'm not perfect and I make some mistakes when bashing Morpheus, I fell that my motives are right. I'm probably the only person here with trap_jaw that can educate people about that. That also make you aware (morph devs) of your too many problems in both ethics and software efficiency.

In fact my posts might benifit to Morpheus in the end because my comments are read and debated, I fell like a cheap beta tester or a person in a image commity helping you improve the app. My intentions is that everybody should use something else than morpheus but the consequences of my posts might do otherwise. We'll see. Until then people should learn to avoid by their own conclusions poor apps like Morpheus.

Ciao