> they never really finished the pubsub implementation and js-ipfs still can't run in the browser because there is no IPFS network that communicates using WebSockets and not TCP/UDP
I don't believe the pub/sub is critical functionality (progress at [0], but it's really just chatty). Progress of that additional feature should not be a measuring stick for the project as a whole. For js-ipfs, I see work being done frequently, e.g. the DHT work[1] and weekly syncs[2]. I agree work is slow, but I am not getting the impression it is fizzing out.
Having said that, I think there are fundamental problems with the ideas behind it. I want MaidSafe's ideas and IPFS's completion/MVP schedule. IPFS doesn't bring enough anonymity or forced, equitable, encrypted block sharing IMO (I am aware of efforts on both fronts of course).
I don't believe the pub/sub is critical functionality (progress at [0], but it's really just chatty). Progress of that additional feature should not be a measuring stick for the project as a whole. For js-ipfs, I see work being done frequently, e.g. the DHT work[1] and weekly syncs[2]. I agree work is slow, but I am not getting the impression it is fizzing out.
Having said that, I think there are fundamental problems with the ideas behind it. I want MaidSafe's ideas and IPFS's completion/MVP schedule. IPFS doesn't bring enough anonymity or forced, equitable, encrypted block sharing IMO (I am aware of efforts on both fronts of course).
0 - https://github.com/ipfs/notes/issues/64
1 - https://github.com/ipfs/js-ipfs/pull/856
2 - https://github.com/ipfs/js-ipfs/issues/1179