Re: [gnome-network]Download manager

On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 23:04 +0200, Manuel Clos wrote:
> >>Anyway, if you want to really start another project, define some IDL so 
> >>programs can operate with different download managers seamlessly.
> > 
> > yes, this could make a lot of sense. We don't really want to start a new
> > project, and that's why we were looking at emphetamine. But what we want
> > is to have a download manager in gnome-network. This is something that
> > must be in the core desktop, and since gnome-network will be included in
> > GNOME core for 2.6, we need to have it.
> I read this on the emphetamine mail:
> "... I have been planning on rewriting it from
> scratch to use a separate daemon backend and gui frontend code, so that
> it can be integrated better into the desktop as *the* download manager ..."
> Downman has been built around the daemon/GUI separation already, this is 
> what attracted me of darxite in the old days.
> I don't think there is need to put a download manager _inside_ 
> gnome-network. The core release also needs a simple text editor, but 
> gedit is packaged standalone. What benefits will result from packaging 
> downman inside gnome-network? I mean, apart from being in gnome-cvs and 
> getting translations, which can be done as a standalone module.
well, it will be included in the core release of GNOME. I guess this is
a good reason on its own. gnome-network is already scheduled for
inclusion in 2.6, so...

> > I've CC'ed Rodney, who is emphetamine developer, and who is doing some
> > refactoring code on emphetamine before including it in gnome-network. I
> > guess we can come to a shared solution.
> I have tried to talk to Rodney, but he doesn't seem very kind to 
> discuss. I have just got a "don't bother me" when trying to talk to him.
maybe he was busy :-)

> > But really, gnome-network needs a download manager. Which reminds me
> > that we don't only need a download manager, but a transfer manager,
> > since, as Rodney told me yesterday on IRC, we also want to allow users
> > to upload files, or to make copies of files between remote machines.
> Well, the upload part is not very hard. What involves more work is 
> implementing features, since you have to code it in the daemon, do the 
> command/communication part for the client and the GUI in the client. 
> Upload is just one more feature, since speedlimit, simultaneous 
> downloads and other porperties will also apply to uploads.
> I agree with you with having a download manager in 2.6 or whatever. If 
> you really think that it is better to package it inside gnome-network, I 
> have no objections and I will be very happy to cooperate. Just decide 
> what one is going inside gnome-network, since we don't need two download 
> managers in the same package :)
well, I leave that decision to Rodney and CÚsar :-)


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]