vote for namecoin!

https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/235025.0

Yes.
without wallet encryption
 I tried now transaction and domain registration from GUI. It works fine. Importprivkey, importaddress and dumpprivkey works from the console.
By dumpprivkey first time remained hanging but second time worked.
As I see walletpassphrase and walletpassphrasechange was removed from the command list. In 3.56 was there.

I will try with encrypted wallet also to make transaction but from the console is difficult without the removed commands.
Transaction fee to move less then 1 namecoin inside of my wallet was 0.005 NMC, 1/3 of a domain registration fee. Was the same with the old wallet ?

I think so. This is staying there.
Namecoin version 0.3.62
Copyright © 2009-2013 The Bitcoin and Namecoin developers

help

backupwallet <destination>
buildmerkletree <obj>...
createrawtransaction [{"txid":txid,"vout":n},...] {address:amount,...}
decoderawtransaction <hex string>
deletetransaction <txid>
dumpprivkey <namecoinaddress>
encryptwallet <passphrase>
getaccount <namecoinaddress>
getaccountaddress <account>
getaddressesbyaccount <account>
getauxblock [<hash> <auxpow>]
getbalance [account] [minconf=1]
getblockbycount height
getblockbyhash hash
getblockcount
getblocknumber
getconnectioncount
getdifficulty
getgenerate
gethashespersec
getinfo
getmemorypool [data]
getnewaddress [account]
getrawtransaction <txid> [verbose=0]
getreceivedbyaccount <account> [minconf=1]
getreceivedbyaddress <namecoinaddress> [minconf=1]
gettransaction <txid>
getwork [data]
getworkaux <aux>
help [command]
importaddress <namecoinaddress> [label] [rescan=true]
importprivkey <namecoinprivkey> [label] [rescan=true]
listaccounts [minconf=1]
listaddressgroupings
listreceivedbyaccount [minconf=1] [includeempty=false]
listreceivedbyaddress [minconf=1] [includeempty=false]
listtransactions [account] [count=10] [from=0]
listunspent [minconf=1] [maxconf=9999999] ["address",...]
move <fromaccount> <toaccount> <amount> [minconf=1] [comment]
name_clean
name_debug
name_debug1 <name>
name_filter [regexp] [maxage=36000] [from=0] [nb=0] [stat]
name_firstupdate <name> <rand> [<tx>] <value>
name_history <name>
name_list [<name>]
name_new <name>
name_scan [<start-name>] [<max-returned>]
name_show <name>
name_update <name> <value> [<toaddress>]
sendfrom <fromaccount> <tonamecoinaddress> <amount> [minconf=1] [comment] [comment-to]
sendmany <fromaccount> {address:amount,...} [minconf=1] [comment]
sendrawtransaction <hex string>
sendtoaddress <namecoinaddress> <amount> [comment] [comment-to]
sendtoname <namecoinname> <amount> [comment] [comment-to]
setaccount <namecoinaddress> <account>
setgenerate <generate> [genproclimit]
setmininput <amount>
settxfee <amount>
signmessage <namecoinaddress> <message>
signrawtransaction <hex string> [{"txid":txid,"vout":n,"scriptPubKey":hex},...] [<privatekey1>,...] [sighashtype="ALL"]
stop
validateaddress <namecoinaddress>
verifymessage <namecoinaddress> <signature> <message>

that's all
---------
walletpassphrase
Error: running with an unencrypted wallet, but walletpassphrase was called. (code -15)

It seems that the command is there only help is not listing it.

If the wallet is not encrypted, "encryptwallet" appears. Otherwise "walletpassphrase" appears. This is normal, and it is the way it's done in Bitcoin.

Namecoin News Thread: https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/236340.0

added name filter to Manage Names..

I will update this thread for QT Updates (apart from major updates) in the future
https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/236375.0

We will update the news thread with latest official releases along with other software

I've been spending a bit of time learning about Namecoin, and a couple questions/thoughts came to mind: 

1) Would it make more sense for the Namecoin blockchain to only know about (name, hash(value)) pairs instead of the full values?  Storage and serving of full values could then remain optional for blockchain-verifying nodes, and there would be a great deal of flexibility with how (hash(value), value) pairs are stored and served - e.g. a DHT could be used to store and serve these, but there doesn't have to be one single way.  Then nodes could be discerning about what data they want to store and serve, while still being able to verify the Namecoin blockchain.  It would also reduce the necessary burden on miners, making them more likely to mine.

2) Proper name revocation seems to be a necessary feature for Namecoin to function as a PKI, so I'm wondering if this is addressed?  If yes, then if the private key controlling my name is compromised and an attacker transfers control of the name to himself, do I have any time window to revoke the name altogether?  If I revoke a name, how long before somebody can claim it?  If name revocation isn't currently possible, do the devs think it would be a valuable enough feature to support?

Oh, sorry for the ignorance.  Though I don't quite understand what you mean by this...

Fair enough, being able to revoke names after a transfer is probably going too far.  The goal is really only to be able to announce in an unjammable way that one's control over a name has been compromised.  I'm thinking this could be done by allowing a name to be 'double spent' at any point along its history (up to a reasonable limit), where the transaction merely adds a change-of-ownership flag at that point, and therefore doesn't mess with the name's value or who owns it.

Edit: I guess you could just reuse the same address during value updates, and only change addresses when you're transferring ownership.  Address reuse isn't as bad with Namecoin since there's no linking of coins like with Bitcoin, but this would mean public keys are revealed well in advance of a transfer, making them more prone to attack in the event that weaknesses are found in the signing algorithm.  Would these special flagging transactions be worth adding in order to keep public keys secret?

Just to nip any confusion in the bud right here, there never was any 'original namecoin GUI client' ... only ever the namecoind daemon, that you interface with cli rpc calls.