William Liquorice schreef op di 01-03-2022 om 19:51 [+]:
> Hello,
>
> A year or two ago, I tried to wrap my head around GNUnet so that I could
> try to make parallel implementations of small bits in Rust, but found
> its documentation to be utterly impenetrable. Not even from a technical
>
Spam killed this. We already constantly have to delete 'bug reports'
from the Web that were submitted as link spam. A wiki will drain
resources to keep the spammers out, and at the same time experience says
the contributions will be low quality (it has been tried).
If someone really is capable and
I don't know if this will be a popular proposal, but I really believe that
setting up a self-hosted Wiki could be a very good choice. No complicate
git clone, no complaints, just read/edit what you need, and distributed
responsibilities about its design and direction.
My two cents
On Tue, Mar 1,
On 3/1/22 8:51 PM, William Liquorice wrote:
> Hello,
>
> A year or two ago, I tried to wrap my head around GNUnet so that I could
> try to make parallel implementations of small bits in Rust, but found
> its documentation to be utterly impenetrable. Not even from a technical
> standpoint, the mass
Hello,
A year or two ago, I tried to wrap my head around GNUnet so that I could
try to make parallel implementations of small bits in Rust, but found
its documentation to be utterly impenetrable. Not even from a technical
standpoint, the massive reference manual / "handbook" is quite
overwhel
Hi there,
On the #gnunet IRC channel, there's been some discussion about the
usefulness of gnunet. It's been noted that
(1) gnunet is essentially unusable because transport is unreliable,
(2) it's not known what causes this unreliability, and
(3) transport-ng is an effort to rewrite transport, e
