26/09/14 06:12, intrigeri wrote:
> hi,
>
> anonym wrote (26 Sep 2014 02:46:31 GMT) :
>> A difference compared to the old `tails-start-i2p` is that it opens the
>> router console in the web browser (starting it if necessary) once it's
>> ready (simply by waiting for port 7657 to start listening) but your
>> script doesn't. IMHO it's a pretty good portal to various I2P services
>> and web pages, so that's a bit of a loss. What do you think?
>
> IMO, opening the console automatically made much sense when one had to
> start I2P manually, but once it's started automatically I'm less sure.
Right. Also, it would be bad to get back the old "autostart the browser"
behaviour in this case.
> Perhaps adding a bookmark would be enough to make this portal (and
> status console) easily available?
We currently have such a bookmark in the I2P bookmark folder. Even if
"i2p" isn't given on the kernel command-line.
> But then, a problem with this idea
> is that the bookmark can be confusing when I2P isn't enabled, and
> I doubt we want to start adding bookmarks dynamically depending on
> whether I2P is enabled, so I'm afraid I've got no good solution to
> this problem.
>
> OTOH, once we have the dedicated I2P browser, then we can
> unconditionally add this bookmark (and other I2P-related ones, maybe)
> to its dedicated profile, and boom, problem solved.
>
> So, my current preferred solution is:
>
> 1. ignore this problem as far as #7732 is concerned
> 2. open a subtask of the ticket that tracks the dedicated I2P browser,
> titled "Add a bookmark for the I2P router console in the I2P
> browser", which ensures we don't close that ticket without
> resolving the problem.
>
> Thoughts?
Sounds good to me. Filed as #7948.
Cheers!
