Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add fcploadplugin #14

Closed
wants to merge 2 commits into from
Closed

Add fcploadplugin #14

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

misaakidis
Copy link

Added a new command-line freenet application that loads a plugin to the node, given a plugin URI. Internally it is using the LoadPlugin (https://wiki.freenetproject.org/FCPv2/LoadPlugin) message.

@Soliloque
Copy link
Contributor

  • Adding a manpage would be nice
  • We need a new version number for the whole package


try:
plugin_uri
except NameError:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This seems a very strange way to check for validity. Do these bindings really not have some kind of key class that will parse them?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay. These utilities could use some cleanup then - I don't see a good reason to parse like that. In addition, such common things should be implemented in the library instead of the included utilities to avoid such a large pressure toward duplicating code. I'm surprised there isn't a FreenetKey class in the library already.

Is there a reason to parse this? My understanding is that the leading "freenet:" is unnecessary. There are no decisions made from parsing at this level other than to error out when it's invalid. Would it work to send it to the node without checking it and let the node return any errors?

@Thynix
Copy link
Contributor

Thynix commented Mar 14, 2015

Thanks for posting this!

@Thynix
Copy link
Contributor

Thynix commented Apr 9, 2015

Any word on responding to the feedback?

@Thynix
Copy link
Contributor

Thynix commented May 12, 2015

Closed for inactivity. Please let me know if you'd like it to be reopened.

@Thynix Thynix closed this May 12, 2015
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants