-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Josh Williams wrote: > On Nov 29, 2007 6:20 PM, David Ginger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> So can I ask is a wget2 actualy being developed ? > > Go ahead, but I'll answer that question before you do ;-) > > The answer is no - not at the moment. But we've been discussing it for > several months. It will be a while before any code is actually > written.
Specifically, it will probably be years, unless we can get a much-needed influx of developers in here. The list of issues targeted at Wget 1.12 are many, and most of them really should be resolved before we begin work on the "beefier" Wget. And, as I am (1) by far the most active current Wget developer, and (2) not all that terribly active, given that it's all just in my spare time ;) - work is liable to be a bit slow. The good news is, once the Wget 1.12 stuff is out of the way, we can move almost all focus to the new thing, as Wget will be almost completely in bug-fixes-only mode. Given that's the case, one might argue that Wget 2.0 is in fact a reasonable name for the new package. I'm still thinking about that stuff, and will probably add a Wiki page for the purpose of names discussion soon. At the release of Wget 1.11, it is my intention to try to attract as much developer interest as possible. At the moment, and despite Wget's pervasive presence, it has virtually no user or developer community. Given the amount of work that needs to be done, this is not good. The announcement of the first new release of GNU Wget in two years seems a great opportunity to solicit help! - -- Micah J. Cowan Programmer, musician, typesetting enthusiast, gamer... http://micah.cowan.name/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHT1FT7M8hyUobTrERAswMAJ9rNSv2kC1MIy3vErblMfcqBmcWdQCgjT2z C8kgh5b4msWnw0ORb8x0Jl8= =VMV+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
