Am Monday 10 December 2012 schrieb Micah Cowan:
> On 12/09/2012 02:45 AM, Tim Rühsen wrote:
> > Am Samstag, 8. Dezember 2012 schrieb 7382...@gmail.com:
> >> Hello
> >>
> >> I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate).
> >> It would put less strain on servers being downloa
On 12/09/2012 02:45 AM, Tim Rühsen wrote:
> Am Samstag, 8. Dezember 2012 schrieb 7382...@gmail.com:
>> Hello
>>
>> I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate). It
>> would put less strain on servers being downloading from, and use less of
>> their bandwidth. Is it okay to
On 12/09/2012 04:11 AM, Giuseppe Scrivano wrote:
> 7382...@gmail.com writes:
>
>> I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate). It
>> would put less strain on servers being downloading from, and use less of
>> their bandwidth. Is it okay to add this idea to the
>> http://w
7382...@gmail.com writes:
> I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate). It
> would put less strain on servers being downloading from, and use less of
> their bandwidth. Is it okay to add this idea to the
> http://wget.addictivecode.org/FeatureSpecifications page?
I don'
Am Samstag, 8. Dezember 2012 schrieb 7382...@gmail.com:
> Hello
>
> I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate). It
> would put less strain on servers being downloading from, and use less of
> their bandwidth. Is it okay to add this idea to the
> http://wget.addictivecode
Hello
I think wget should HTTP compression (Accept-Encoding: gzip, deflate). It
would put less strain on servers being downloading from, and use less of
their bandwidth. Is it okay to add this idea to the
http://wget.addictivecode.org/FeatureSpecifications page? I don't know
where on the page to a
