Still, can someone explain the benefit of this download system over including it?
On Sat, 2006-05-27 at 12:09 +0200, Álvaro J. Iradier wrote: > I agree, but better include more parameters. I mean, instead of > deciding the correct version i client side, let's send the > architecture, platform, and other info to the server, and let the php > script in the server select the right TLS package. This way, we have > an easily upgradeable download system. > > Greets. > > On 5/26/06, Youness Alaoui <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi there, > > as you probably know, the tls autodownloader isn't working for some time > > now because the URL for the download is to a mirror which is not working > > anymore... > > So.. if we change the mirror, we might get the same problem some other > > time, so how about we do this instead > > http://amsn.sf.net/download-tls.php?platform=win32 > > and it will automatically choose a different mirror each time and redirect > > to it. > > in case this one fails (because SF web servers are down more often than sf > > file releases mirrors), then use a hardcoded URL for a mirror (or random > > between a few hardcoded ones). > > Advantage is that if we had done this in the first time, then we probably > > would have been able to make amsn users download tls 1.5 without releasing > > a new version nor having the users update their amsn version. > > What do you think? shall it be done ? > > > > -- > > KaKaRoTo > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Amsn-devel mailing list > > Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel > > > >
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Amsn-devel mailing list Amsn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/amsn-devel
