It's more than cool. A proper torrent client is a step up from an ordinary download manager in that it's tolerant of both poor connections and instances of blocked paths to a specific connection. It doesn't resume interrupted downloads as much as handle downloads in whatever quantities it can get.
I have a cable modem in a Washington DC area suburb, and yet my connection's sufficiently flaky that torrenting works better than direct-downloading, even with a download manager. I assume a lot of the world isn't as well-connected as me. On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:55 AM, Fernando Cassia <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Raphael Bircher <[email protected]> wrote: >> But I could ask my brother if he is willing to setup a torrent tracker >> for us. He was working on the torrent at the old OOo project. >> >> I'm willing to host a seeding peer > > Wouldn´t this impact on the tracking of downloads? I mean... the > SourceForge download stats will no longer be the true download count. > How would Apache track torrent downloads and add the numbers to the > SF.net stats?. > > I think this is a valid concern... > > Plus, torrents are good to save on bandwidth, but lack of bandwidth > with SF.net´s network of world-wide mirrors doesn´t seem to be the > case here. So, again, why the need for a torrent?. "because it´s cool" > doesn´t hold, IMHO... > FC
