*edit:* ~~voker57: sure, but a stable and we'll built protocol is a good thing. IMO it's much better to work with the IPFS developers helping everyone to reach a stable v1.0.0 faster, then heading off and building out your own clients, with additional functionality.

The last thing the IPFS ecosystem needs is a bunch of people working on diverging clients, creating a fractured and non-interoperable community (for example, js-ipfs is an example of an IPFS client which has interoperability issues with the bulk of the nodes providing a solid IPFS ecosystem running go-ipfs).

Also the specs could change completely before a v1.0.0 is reached, which could invalidate a lot of work people would do by creating their own clients from scratch~~ -> voker57: sure, but a stable and we'll built protocol is a good thing. IMO it's much better to work with the IPFS developers helping everyone to reach a stable v1.0.0 faster, then heading off and building out your own clients, with additional functionality.

The last thing the IPFS ecosystem needs is a bunch of people working on diverging clients, creating a fractured and non-interoperable community (for example, js-ipfs is an example of an IPFS client which has interoperability issues with the bulk of the nodes providing a solid IPFS ecosystem running go-ipfs).

Also the specs could change completely before a v1.0.0 is reached, which could invalidate a lot of work people would do by creating their own clients from scratch

Stable v1.0.0 -> additional features is really the best thing for and software product