Re: Determining whether gnunet is connected

[Schanzenbach, Martin]

> On 2. Mar 2022, at 16:31, awds--- via Peer-to-Peer networking with GNUnet 
> <help-gnunet@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> Since GNUnet is currently an academic exercise, it should be removed
> from main distribution repositories. For example: Anyone thinking to
> try GNUnet on Debian-based machines would look in Synaptic and install
> GNUnet v0.10.1. Presumably that build-version worked when it was first
> included in the repositories, but now GNUnet is at v0.16.0 which is not
> backward compatible.

That reasoning does not make sense.
Which packages to include and in what version is completely under the
discretion of the distribution and packager.
So, for example, Debian commonly includes quite "dated" packages
in stable (in comparison with other distros).
Users running Debian will all install this version. GNUnet 0.10 peers are
still compatible to _each other_. So there is not problem there in theory.
In practice you may not find a lot of peers (but I may be wrong!)
Of course we do not recommend running 0.10. But what distributions do
is not in our purview.

Most gnunet packages are in community repositories as far as I know.
And that is perfectly fine for now. If a packager wants to pick it up
that is also fine. If a DD decides to bump the version because there is
a full moon today that is also great.

> 
> The low version number should warn users away, but GNUnet in the
> repositories is misleading given its low level of development.
> 

We do not want to "warn users away". But certainly manage expectations.
Distributions often contain very early stage software.
Mostly when that software is not part of the core system, though.
And usually in "unstable" repositories.
I remember the first few releases of GNOME3, which were almost unusable due to 
bugs
and had major feature regressions from GNOME2 as an extreme example.
Or Wayland which still has issues/missing features.

In comparison with those code bases, gnunet is still relatively accessible.
(But it is very much systems programming)

> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tirifto <tirifto@posteo.cz>
> To: help-gnunet@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Determining whether gnunet is connected
> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 14:34:19 +0000
> 
> On Tue, 01 Mar 2022 20:28:22 +0000
> Fungilife can be eternal <fungilife@protonmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Where does it say on the front page, or on the packages thrown out in
>> Arch's AUR and elsewhere, "alpha project not fully functional"??
>> "we know ..."  ..."Nobody is claiming otherwise"  you may know,
>> someone in authority of the gnunet site should also tell the world.
> 
> For what it’s worth, it is very clearly mentioned in the ‘Install’ page
> on the website, accessible either from the navigation bar’s
> ‘Documentation’ menu, or by scrolling down the home page and clicking
> ‘Get started’. I would assume that anyone stumbling upon the GNUnet
> website and wondering how they can get started wouldn’t miss it, but I
> may just as well be wrong. More prominent it could be, in any case.
> 
> The package descriptions could mention it, too, but here I want to note
> that I don’t recall many packages doing this. From what I’ve seen, most
> packages only state their goals in their description, without
> elaborating on their stage of development. The version being ‘zero
> point
> something’ should be a clear indicator that this is *not* in any way
> finished and likely *not* fully functional. But it’s also true that
> even some very functional software likes to stay on version zero for
> too long, so perhaps this reasoning can’t be counted on. So I’m not
> saying it’s a bad idea, just that it’s also not a no-brainer.
> 
> 
>

signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP