On Wednesday 21 May 2014 16:32:59 Giuseppe Scrivano wrote: > Tim Ruehsen <[email protected]> writes: > > AFAIK, it is more a 'would be nice'. Guiseppe as the maintainer should > > know or at least is in the right position to ask someone of the GNU > > 'organization'. > I guess that nobody in the FSF knows better than us what is the best > technical decision to take for the project, so let's not involve them > before we know what we want.
Hmm, I thought more about 'political' decisions. Of course we know the technical part better than anyone else, well, I hope so ;-) > Mine was a proposal, not a decision, I was also thinking about HTTP 2.0 > support: delegating the HTTP layer to libcurl will give us support for > HTTP 2.0 when it will be needed. HTTP 2.0 will be needed by wget > because it will help a lot in the recursive retrieving scenario. That's an argument. > > I am not sure, how we find enough people-power for this task. On the other > > hand side, that's what I've done in the Mget project. I guess, a merge of > > Mget and Wget would be less work. Mget already implements most of Wget's > > options plus a bunch more. > > That is exactly the problem, we haven't enough people-power :-( > If there are things in mget that can be merged into wget now, I think we > should just do it. I think you are in the best position, as mget author > and long term wget contributor to suggest future steps here :-) Is > there anything we can easily move to wget? Let me think about it. Currently I do not have much time (work, family, bees, garden, ... keep me busy), but it should be enough to make a plan in the 1-2 weeks. Regards, Tim
