On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Micah Cowan <[email protected]> wrote: > I think the maintainer is aware that Wget's code quality is poor, and > would welcome sweeping architectural changes; I know I would have, when > I was maintainer.
Just an idea... why not "fork" it, call it "wget-NG" (Next Generation ;), and develop it in parallel. When/if the "brand new, nifty, easier to maintain, completelly cool design" next-generation turns out to be as stable and a drop-in replacement for the older -and judged as such by the community- then the community itself will switch to ´wget-ng´ (or ´wgetr2´), and at that point the old code base can stop being maintained... Again: just an idea. And by the way, thanks for the response Micah. I don´t want to know who´s behind every email, as long as the FSF knows who it´s dealing with. I wasn´t aware that paperwork was required. Then I guess it´s OK. I was just concerned since wget is too ubiquitous and becomes easy target for nefarious sources to inject vulnerabilities into it... Best regards, FC -- During times of Universal Deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act - George Orwell
