Yes, it's definitely nicer that it's defined now & whoever works on it
has info on where to start.

I'm moving this to the top of the ideas page
http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion/web/gsoc-ideas
because it seems like relatively low hanging fruit, important, &
potentially affecting many people (DTA has been downloaded 31 million
times!! & I'm guessing it's how most people use metalinks).

On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 4:26 AM, Hampus Wessman<[email protected]> wrote:
> Nice. Sounds doable.
> / Hampus
>
> Anthony Bryan skrev:
>
> Nils was kind enough to provide details (and I imagine help along the
> way as well): http://bugs.code.downthemall.net/trac/ticket/413#comment:4
>
> Replying to ant:
>
>     Nils, will you still accept a patch for this?
>
> Sure.
>
>     If so, could you provide some guidance on where to start?
>
> The verification code lives in
> trunk/chrome/content/dta/manager/verificator.js
>
>     There is already whole file checksumming support, so is
> checksumming each chunk the difficult part, or is it changing DTA to
> re-request a chunk when the checksums don't match?
>
> There are multiple parts needed to implemented:
>
>     * Parsing the metalink trunk/chrome/content/dta/manager/metalinker.js
>     * Storing stuff, so that is survives between sessions. This has to
> be backwards-compatible, i.e. loading old queue items lacking the new
> stuff has to be successful. See the .toSource methods
> trunk/chrome/content/dta/manager.js
>     * Calculating the checksums
> trunk/chrome/content/dta/manager/verificator.js
>     * Asking the user what he'd like to do in case of error.
>     * Setting up the retry chunks in case of error and starting the
> download again(in the quest of uncoupling please do not mess with
> QueueItem? data from verificator or similar, but instead provide some
> public methods in QueueItem? that can be used for this matter).
>
> I know that esp. the verificator/metalinker code is not very well
> designed and too tightly coupled. Any implementor should try not to
> add even more coupling, however.
>
> See CreatingPatches.
>
> It would be great if a patch would do the following, however this is
> optional:
>
>     * split verificator into a re-usable js module and some "user" code.
>     * split metalinker into a re-usable js module (parser/validation),
> interface code (the selection dialog) and manager.js stuff.
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2009 at 9:14 AM, Hampus Wessman<[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>
> True. I'll look into it! Shouldn't be that hard.
> / Hampus
>
>
> Ant Bryan skrev:
>
> thanks Hampus! I think it's one of the most useful too! so much so,
> that I think it may be more important than ME2. not to knock ME2! :)
> but ME1 is great enough and gets us by fine (not that the new features
> would be good too).
>
> I wonder how much work this actually is?
>
> On May 9, 4:29 am, Hampus Wessman <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> That would be really nice. Chunk checksums is one of the coolest
> metalink features, IMO!
>
> I could do this after I've finished Metalink Editor 2.0, but that might
> take some time. It would be even better if someone else did it before!
>
> Hampus Wessman
>
> On Fri, 8 May 2009 17:31:15 -0400
>
> Anthony Bryan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
> I don't have any numbers to back this up, but I'd guess that most
> metalink users are taking advantage of them with DownThemAll!.
>
>
> DTA is easy to use, pleasant looking, & just a Firefox extension install
> away.
>
>
> the only metalink related feature it lacks is repairing a download if
> the metalink has chunk checksums. it already verifies checksums for
> the whole file.
>
>
> I think this should be one of our higher priorities, because of the
> amount of people that DTA reaches. for instance, openSUSE uses
> metalinks with chunk checksums, but if a downloader uses a metalink
> client that doesn't support them then the downloader could get
> frustrated if there's an error in their big download...
>
>
> we have this on our ideas page & here's the request in the DTA bugtracker
>
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion/web/gsoc-ideas
> http://bugs.code.downthemall.net/trac/ticket/413
>
>
> does anyone with JS skills want to work on this? Nils had said he
> would accept a patch.
> maybe someone from the openSUSE community could do it?
>
>
> --
> (( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [http://www.metalinker.org]
>   )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>



-- 
(( Anthony Bryan ... Metalink [ http://www.metalinker.org ]
  )) Easier, More Reliable, Self Healing Downloads

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Metalink Discussion" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to