2 ms·
> As a consumer of source code, I do not use a graphical web browser to search and download from Sourceforge. A relatively simple http/https client will do. On
by exikyut 8y ago
> As a consumer of source code, I do not use a graphical web browser to search and download from Sourceforge. A relatively simple http/https client will do.
One caveat: all the file download links end in .../download, so if I throw the URL at wget it will save "download?verylongblahblah=blahblah1234567890". I have to use `wget --content-d` (short for content-disposition) to actually save the name correctly.
It's really annoying, but a behavior that has existed for many years.
GitHub fixed this with everything, from release downloads to raw gist links, by putting the "download" attribute further back in the URL, and having everything after the final slash be the uploaded file's filename.
Now THAT's nice.
- textmode 8y ago"Now THAT's nice." Yes it is. There is a certain consistency/uniformity to the url and site structure with Github that Sourceforge does not have, for whatever reason. Not to mention the absence of the mirror choosing routine. I really appreciate the ease and simplicity of Github downloads, which is precisely why I am concerned about the future.