I do understand that the GDF does take forever to adopt new things, so I do understand why he chose to strike out without them--and in many ways that is fine.

If it was just an extention to the existing protocol or even for the udp querying tacked on top that would be great. The problem I had was the name and the actual difference in the protocol specs from the origional gnutella. And for a lot of people I think that might be all they objected to, that he took it upon himself to hack out a new protocol and then grabbed the name gnutella2 (and of course, Vinnie grabbed gnutella3) when it wasn't a v2 of the previous protocol.

I know the arguement that we shouldn't be taking too much on the origional protocol specs, and that backwards compatability is limiting in some cases--but I ferverently beleave that the gnutella protocol should remain a open group effort, even with the limitations that has in maintaining the complexity and backwards compatability issues.

Anyway, I'm rambling. My issue was with his choice ot use the name and to go on an aggressive marketing campaign about how gnutella is dead and gnutella2 is the future. I don't support him at all in that (although I don't have any particular issue with his client, and I do know that he is a gifted programmer). I mean, even if he had called it the "Shareaza" network or something like that, and marketed it as "Overcoming the limitations of the gnutella protocol" I would be happier then calling it "Gnutella2" and marketing it as "The end of gnutella 0.6".

Anyway, thats my problem with it, although really I tend to stay seperate from the flame war because I do see both sides of it, and although I don't disagree I do sympathsize with developers who are trying to improve gnutella in a way they feel is best against the wishes of BearShare and Limewire.