[qcl820DV34]

The issue is that the original name, "Freenet", was repurposed for a different codebase.

[sanity]

Different codebase, same purpose.

This isn't even the first time we did a ground-up redesign/rewrite of the Freenet codebase, we did this in 2008 with the 0.7 release.

[FEELmyAGI]

Neither of you get to be freenet, another project with the name predated it by a lot. and throughout the 90s many ISPs were named $PLACENAME_freenet

https://case.edu/ech/articles/c/cleveland-freenet

[qcl820DV34]

Repeating a bad decision does not make it any wiser.

[sanity]

History will be the judge, and so far it's looking very promising given our progress.

[16bitvoid]

What does your progress have to do with the name? You're so defensive that you're reasoning with non sequiturs.

[sanity]

What would your success metric be for whether reusing the name was the right decision?

[16bitvoid]

Community size and positive community feedback, which is somewhat tangential to progress, which I assume is in the context of development. Also, the rate at which the original freenet community declines.

Number of contributors or pull requests isn't a good metric at the moment since the advent of Claude Code et al. has seen a dramatic uptick in both everywhere.

[lallysingh]

Should've called the new one Freenet 2 or Freenet NT.

[acheron]

Freenet 3.11 for Workgroups

[sanity]

Freenet++