SAB has dupe checking, but only a standard history. Get had a concept of dupe checking using a hidden history.I haven't tested it in a few months, but I think these are still mostly missing I appreciate the hard work you put into SAB, but this makes me pretty sad because NZBGet had some critical features/quality of life improvements that are missing from SAB despite its active development. The mangling is inconsistent I would need to make assumptions in the code that won't always be true, so risking false positives. I've stopped short of trying to handle that case. Note that some cross-posting tools get very confused when they see this malformed field, and mangle it further. While it's not exactly the most elegant code I've ever written, it's very 'surgical' and should not affect the processing of well-formed NZBs. But it is very careful not to trigger 'false positives' and only acts if it detects a very specific string pattern that should only occur in these malformed fields. Since the field is malformed in a way that's plain ugly (and inconsistent), my fix isn't as clean as the rest of nzbget's code. Turns out it's an ugly, deliberately-malformed field in the NZBs from some release groups. If the problems you're having is filenames that start 'abc.xyz' then you may find my fork helpful, as I was having the same problem and fixed it. But again, I'd much rather do it in the original repo, so:ī) the existing issues or pull requests are not 'lost'Ĭ) people don't see an archived, read-only project and assume it's 'dead' If hugbug isn't willing to pass the torch (which is his right), then I guess we'd have to set up an org/team, rather than it being a fork on an individual account. Since there are a bunch of stars on the original repo, and several pull requests outstanding, it seems like I'm not alone in wanting to see it maintained. Personally, I tend to be a little reluctant to depend on an open-source project that only has one developer, so if hugbug is open to adding contributors to the original repo, I'd be actively seeking others to pitch in, too. In reality, it's been inactive for over a year, the only thing that's changed is hugbug made the repo read-only. Most folks would see that the project is archived and assume it's dead. There are 171 forks, after all - which one? However, I'd much prefer that he accepts help with maintaining NZBGet in its original repo, rather than us trying to get everyone to know that there's a fork somewhere out there that is being maintained. Of course, NZBGet is working fine the way it is, but wanted to share in case anyone wants to pick up the torch and continue the development □Īh, that explains why my ears were burning :)ĭoes anyone have active contact with hugbug? Hugbug has given us a gift, and he certainly has the prerogative to move on to other things. It shows the risk of many (Usenet) open-source programs: they are mostly dependent on a single person. I hope he/she/they will clearly indicate their relation (or the lack of) to the original project, to not fool users. Since the project is open source anyone can fork it. He mentioned in previous email contact that he lost interested in NZBGet a bit over the years, so it did not come as a surprise to me. I reached out to him to see if he hopes/wants someone else to take over development, will update if I get a response. While new releases already became sparse over the past few years, it seems hugbug has now officially abandoned the development of NZBGet.The repository on Github has been archived and is now read-only: This includes hacking, using a loophole, or other methods not publicly advertised by the usenet provider. No promoting of 'backdoor' access into usenet providers' networks. We do not allow attempts to request/offer/buy/sell/trade/share invites or accounts. We will even add flair to your username after verification. Message the mods and let them know who you are. However we want to verify the identity of anyone posting on behalf of a company/project. No discussion of specific media content names, titles, etc. We only have a few, but they are important. Please read over the rules before contributing. We are a thriving community dedicated to helping users old and new understand and use usenet.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |