Shareaza 2.0 Released Under GPL

RageEar writes "Today it was announced that the latest version of Shareaza, a popular P2P application for Windows, was released under the GPL. Currently the source code is hosted by the Shareaza servers, but the announcement makes mention of the code becoming a project on Sourceforge. The binaries are still available for Windows only, but I imagine it is only a matter of time before a Linux port emerges."

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps?

[yokimbo]

Wouldn't it be easier, as OSS, to thwart RIAA/etc attemps to mess with it. When you've got a determined community vs RIAA, I'm in favor of OSS.

API

[KoriaDesevis]

If the API used by P2P apps is open and documentation for it is readily available on the net (e.g. Gnutella protocol), does releasing this app as open source really prove much? The original Gnutella's source is still available and I would think this would be simpler to follow (was more of a simplistic implementation)...

Hey, I won't argue with making it OpenSource, I think it's a positive thing either way. In this case, though, I don't see too much benefit if the goal is to create spinoffs. If the goal is to have community recommendations, that might be a little more beneficial...

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps?

[BiggsTheCat]

Well, Shareaza's protocols were already open; the Gnutella network spec and eDonkey network spec are already documented, even if the code isn't available.

The big boys generally don't look at the data coming over the wire since it's too much of a hassle. It's far easier if they actually participate in the network and then watch who downloads from them.

If you're really paranoid about it, though, you could engineer some crypto into the networks... assuming you can trust your peers and they agree to the same crypto. Security by obscurity of protocol rarely works.

Re:do we really want OSS P2P apps?

[sameb]

You'd prefer security through obscurity?

Open source clients & protocols, like LimeWire (on Gnutella) have made huge advances in the level of file-sharing, forcing other proprietary apps to play catch-up (and, in this case, probably playing a big part in making Shareaza go open source).

The same logic behind wanting voting machines & encryption schemes to be open source applies to wanting p2p networks & clients as open source.

Re:You miss the point

[Otto]

If the DMCA notice arrives...

There's no *basis* upon which they can send a DMCA takedown notice.

A DMCA takedown notice states, under penalty of perjury that the material in question is copyright infringing material and is owned by whomever is sending the notice.

Sending a DMCA notice to someone is a legal document stating that the material you're bitching about is, in fact, owned by you or somebody you represent. If you don't in fact own that material, you just committed perjury and can be held liable for that.

If somebody were so stupid as to send SF a DMCA notice for Shareaza, which is *known* to have been entirely written by this one guy who's putting it out there (he wrote it from scratch, he should know), then they'd be liable for a pretty easy countersuit.

It won't be taken down anytime soon, methinks.

Re:Better?

[sabNetwork]

I beg to differ. Have you ever tried Shareaza? I am not affiliated with either project, and I must say that Shareaza blows other Gnutella clients out of the water.

* The user interface is unmatched, at least on the Windows platform.
* Performance-- LimeWire and Kazaa both suck the crap out of your CPU.
* Support for multiple protocols
* Plugin functionality

The biggest benefit of Shareaza going open source is the inevitable addition of a FastTrack plugin.

Re:anybody compiled it yet

[Chyeld]

Except of course, Limewire only handles one of the many protocols that Sharezilla does. Thus reducing the argument to "don't even bother, you can do 10% of what Sharezilla does with this other bloated Java app."

Re:anybody compiled it yet

[sameb]

You can do 100% of what Shareaza tries to do with LimeWire -- that is, search for and download files. The network it runs on is implementation details. You can in fact say that Shareaza is bloated for adding support for multiple networks instead of making one network work as good as it possibly can.

Bram Cohen has complained that Shareaza's BitTorrent implementation is terrible. Gnutella developers have complained that Shareaza's Gnutella implementation is outdated & that it wrongly sends tons of "Gnutella2" packets to clients that don't want them.

Would you prefer a client that picks a goal and makes it work amazingly well, or a client that tries to do lots of things so-so?

Re:And Soon...

[Anenga]

As soon as the DMCA notices arrive at sourceforge, it'll be taken down.

Just like eMule [sourceforge.net] (Or BitTorrent [sourceforge.net] for that matter), right?

Re:anybody compiled it yet

[Chyeld]

I would prefer an app that allows me to access the multple, fragmented, and previously incompatable, networks used for P2P access today.

Perhaps you only go for the files that have 2000 sources avalaible to connect to, I don't. Having the ability to use all four networks to grab the same file, and not having to worry that if the file drops off the radar on one of the networks that the entire time spent downloading it is wasted is much more important than worrying about whether the developer 'plays well with others'. I could care less if scared cows are being challenged, frankly each and everyone of the 'core' Gnutella developers have tried to hijack the protcol at least once themselved. I could care less if the current implementation of Bittorrent is less than spetacular. It'll get better. What I care about is interopability. Something Limewire has never had.

On the other hand, I currently use eMule. ^_^

Re:Wow

[julesh]

Their software sucks so they need help from outsiders.

Have you actually used it? I find the user interface about the best of all the available non-spyware systems. It uses less CPU and memory time than most others (which _is_ important for a network server app). It works well on 4 different networks, each of which represents a different philosophy of how a P2P network should work.

I really don't see what people have against it, other than political issues dating back to a bad choice the developer made when he chose the name 'Gnutella 2' for his own improved network, a system that is (at least partially) backward compatible with Gnutella.