Re: [Bug-wget] wget2.0 / niwt / refactoring

[Daniel Stenberg]

On Mon, 13 Aug 2012, Tim Ruehsen wrote:

> But we should not forget about a monolithic, backward-compatibel (to wget 
> 1.x) wget 2.0. We all agree, it is time to redesign wget's code architecture 
> to have a clean codebase for new features to implement, to increase 
> readability/hackability, to increase modularity and to increase code 
> reusability (wget-derived libraries). Not to forget current C language / 
> library conventions and features like C99 and Posix compatibility. On older 
> systems wget 1.x would stay the preferred version.

You should know I talk of my own project here, but I would like to remind 
people that when considering an overhaul of a (portable) HTTP/FTP project, 
there might be reasons to think about letting the transfers be handled by 
libcurl. It already supports more protocols, more SSL flavours and more 
features than the wget transfer engine and it exists as a completely free and 
open, proven and well documented library with a stable API today. Most of 
mget's "Not Yet Implemented" features are already supported by libcurl.

This said, I realize it is not kosher for a GNU project since libcurl is not 
GNU and I believe it will be a primary factor that will prevent this from 
happening. I still believe it would be smart from a technical perspecitive.

Also, this is not a new idea and it has been turned down before:
  http://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2007/10/27/wget-going-libcurl/ and
  http://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg01129.html

BTW, would "older systems" include Microsoft Windows too then as you mention 
C99 which isn't supported by Microsoft compilers?

> Started as a just-for-fun coding, I just created a project 'mget' on github. 
> While working on it, I got the idea to merge it with wget 1.x into wget 2.
>
> Please have a look at https://github.com/rockdaboot/mget and let's start a 
> discussion, if that's what we want and how we should go on.

So this is basically a set of patches on top of the stock Wget? If it is, have 
those patches been posted here? If it isn't, how exactly does it relate to 
wget other than being a similar tool?

--

 / daniel.haxx.se