Mauro Tortonesi wrote:
> although i really dislike the name "--no-follow-excluded-html", i
> certainly agree on the necessity to introduce such a feature into
> wget.
> can we come up with a better name (and reach consensus on that)
> before i include this feature in wget 1.11?

I agree "no" shouldn't be used, it would be better to stick to wget naming
schemes : follow_html = on/off. Like there are follow_ftp or follow_tags
options. It's a boolean option, there shouldn't be 2 options to represent
each state. What do you think ?

Reply via email to