Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin@cygwin.com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: cygwin@cygwin.com From: Charles Wilson Subject: Re: Wget ignores robot.txt entry Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2003 23:29:22 -0500 Lines: 20 Message-ID: <3E4C70A2.4020701@ece.gatech.edu> References: <5.2.0.9.2.20030213182750.01e97e98@pop3.cris.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030213185143.01da0ef0@pop3.cris.com> <5.2.0.9.2.20030213190807.03359eb0@pop3.cris.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.2.1) Gecko/20021130 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en In-Reply-To: <5.2.0.9.2.20030213190807.03359eb0@pop3.cris.com> Randall R Schulz wrote: > > What happens to an open source project when it devolves to this state? > Who, for example, could hand out writable access to the wget CVS > repository? Surely this isn't an unrecoverable state of affairs, is it? A fork happens. somebody gets fed up, opens up a new sourceforge project (wget-ng: the next generation), snarfs in the existing wget code and modifies it to build "wget-ng" with a option to build as "wget". Then, snarf in all the extant patches from the 'wget' list. And suddenly, you're the new maintainer of the 'wget' project... But it's bad form to do this if the current maintainer is just on a cruise. If he's really really gone, though, I expect you'd be thanked and not haranged by the userbase. --Chuck -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/