Below is a quote from David about Data Chains. He says Alpha stages, so I would probably guess Data Chains will be a little further down the line. Integration is going to take some time as @frabrunelle mentioned in the update. David said it needs a large scale simulation, but these were some of the things he mentioned must take place first…
1.Design in detail must be complete for phase 1 (data security and persistence)
2.Open debates, presentations and discussion must take place.
3.Code must be written.
4.Code must be tested.
5.Integration into existing system.
6.End to End testing
7.Move to public use.
Of these points 1, 2, 3 & 4 are ongoing right now. Point 5 requires changes to the existing SAFE routing table starting with an RFC. Point 4 will be enhanced as point 2 gets more attention and input. Point 6 is covered by community testing and point 7 is the wider community tests (i.e. Alpha stages).
It would be at the moment, but this is likely to refresh in the next week or so. Then networks will stay up for longer periods. We are planning a schedule for this, but these testnets will be up for many weeks at a time and then when the vaults get republish capabilities etc. the tests wont lose data.
I can see a benefit in blocking the irrelevance and fociusing on only the best and most productive conversations. I hope they restrict the new forum and purge it when any cocky a-hole noob sesquipedalianist’s attempt to shakedown the founders.
I completely agree but still feel stepping up moderation here on specific categories is perhaps less divisive. Most come here wanting to learn. Some are just plain irritating but they seldom last long. A split based on how much coding knowledge you have feels wrong. It could all be accomplished in one place. Perhaps I am looking from the wrong angle as this thing grows (soon by the sound of it) this forum will likely be overrun but I like to think that those with less knowledge learn from those who will be moving to developer forum.
Again I see the argument for such a forum but feel strongly about unity too. Idk probably not worth this much thought
The strapline poll had approximately 100 votes. It’s not like we are talking thousands of participants on this forum. 30 active ‘posters’ perhaps? Most of those I argue will migrate anyhow.
Throwing out an idea … what if the developer forum were read-only for non-developers? That way non-tech people could still try to keep up with what’s going on, could learn from the conversations the developers are having, etc., but wouldn’t be able to clog the discussion with basic questions / static? Non-developers could have their own forum to discuss what they’re reading, and developers could occasionally pop in to answer questions and guide discussion.
I’m writing this as a non-developer myself, who would like to be able to keep up as best I can with what’s going on, but also recognize that a discussion limited to people working with the actual tech makes sense.
I thought ranking of node capability etc. was in the design from the beginning. Now it reads like data chains (which is a very new design) is needed to make it possible for small nodes to participate. What has changed or am i misreading something?
@reivanen I thought so as well in fact I’m almost certain, though I don’t know what previous mechanism (or if one had even existed) was in place for this ability. I’m pretty sure they reduced the amount of managers awhile back and perhaps they progressed away from that for speed and stability and now data chains makes this a much more feasible. Though I’d love to hear it elaborated as well as from the start it seemed like a almost detrimental feature to the networks success
Data chains looks like a large improvement on handling this. It doesn’t mean it cannot be done other ways (count data held etc.) though So you are not mis-reading at all, it’s just (hopefully) and improved and more efficient route (by that I mean network efficient plus solves a few other issues, such as archive nodes, which were going to be a long way away, we get them for nothing here almost).
We would like to announce our intention to launch a developer forum. This new forum would also use the Discourse forum software11, but would be hosted on a different domain (e.g. dev.safenetwork.org). This forum will be a place where core contributors can discuss with the MaidSafe core team and where app developers can get help and give feedback on the Launcher API.
I don’t like the idea of 2 parallel networks, one with good performance and the other without. I prefer only one network that works perfectly:
If the droplets offered by Maidsafe to the community are concentrated on only one network, then the likelihood of a network failure is decreased.
Users need to be accustomed to run a vault to be able to upload files, because at the end they will need to earn safecoins to pay for the puts. Having 2 independent networks is not a good model for that.
My personal safe sites were linked to a vault that gathered information from the network. That means I need both aspects available on the same network (vault + client part) and this is the reason you don’t find mystats and safe-galaxy sites on current test net and more generally you won’t find them on a type A network (but anyway, in a few days, the real reason will be my holidays!).
Until safecoins are introduced, the solution to prevent failures of type B networks is to lower the upload limit back to the level defined previously on past successful test networks with user vaults. The reason is simple: As soon as a new test net is unveiled, the first thing that most people try is uploading the biggest video files they can.
So you are not mis-reading at all, it’s just (hopefully) and improved and more efficient route (by that I mean network efficient plus solves a few other issues, such as archive nodes, which were going to be a long way away, we get them for nothing here almost).