FileZilla design plans

Moderator: Project members

Post Reply
Message
Author
eddan
226 Transfer OK
Posts: 423
Joined: 2004-02-25 08:44
Location: Norway

FileZilla design plans

#1 Post by eddan » 2004-03-01 21:54

I've always wondered what is to come in future versions of FileZilla, and when I saw botg talked about a FileZilla 3.0 version in another post, I tried to look up what botg has said on the issue. The biggest thing seems to be a cross-platform verson which is better designed from the beginning, meaning less hacks and also making it easier to implement new stuff. Check out the "Project of the month"-interview at http://sourceforge.net/potm/potm-2003-11.php.

Do you have a more specific version plan botg? How long are you going to work with 2.x versions and what do you want to implent in 2.x before starting on 3.0? And most importantly, what are the plans for 3.0?

User avatar
botg
Site Admin
Posts: 35509
Joined: 2004-02-23 20:49
First name: Tim
Last name: Kosse

#2 Post by botg » 2004-03-01 22:28

Currently I'm still in the planning phase. This includes the class design for the ftp engine and the helper classes/structures as well as constants etc...
I also have to choose which operations are part of the ftp engine and which operations would have to be handled by the interface part of FileZilla, like recursive directory listings or directory deletion.

The next phase would be to create build environments and a basic framework which should already compile on windows and linux (gentoo linux to be specific). For the windows part, makefiles for MinGW as well as VC++ project files will be provided. Under Linux, I'll provide some standard makefiles and maybe kdevelop project files.

After that, the actual coding begins. For the alpha and early beta versions I'll concentrate on the ftp engine, the user interface will have my full attention later in the beta stage.

As for the user interface, I try to make it similar to the current version as much as possible (though without some of the current limitations).

Among the new features that will be supported by v3 will be FXP, full drag&drop and portability. Once finished, FileZilla should run on Windows, Linux, *BSD, MacOS X.

The 2.x versions aren't dead until v3 is finished, though I don't think I'll add much more features to it. The current code has reached a complexity in some areas which is rather difficult to extend and some features still don't work the way I would like them, like the queue (I did rewrite it twice already and still it's not perfect).

Aardvark Freak
500 Command not understood
Posts: 4
Joined: 2004-03-06 01:43

A Linux Version Would Be Awesome

#3 Post by Aardvark Freak » 2004-03-06 01:48

When the Linux version is done, it will be immensely popular. There isn't a FTP program on Linux that comes close to Filezilla; using gFTP has actually been the most painful part of moving to Linux.

Patte
450 Internal Error
Posts: 36
Joined: 2004-03-03 15:32

#4 Post by Patte » 2004-03-08 17:40

gFTP sucks ass actually :wink:

but i heard filezilla runs with wine....
so it is already cross-platform :lol: :lol: :lol:
(just kidding)
anyway i'm looking forward to FZ3.

a43
504 Command not implemented
Posts: 10
Joined: 2004-03-15 00:34

Re: A Linux Version Would Be Awesome

#5 Post by a43 » 2004-03-15 01:04

Aardvark Freak wrote:When the Linux version is done, it will be immensely popular. There isn't a FTP program on Linux that comes close to Filezilla; using gFTP has actually been the most painful part of moving to Linux.
Same goes for FreeBSD. While there are some EXCELLENT commandline clients (like lftp), and I've come to enjoy the commandline a lot for many things, ftp is one of the things where I really prefer a gui. I'm very excited over the fact that I'll be able to run FileZilla under FreeBSD.

panfr
503 Bad sequence of commands
Posts: 21
Joined: 2004-03-26 08:56

#6 Post by panfr » 2004-03-26 09:41

The only usable guie'd Linux client is IglooFTP-PRO, but it is both commercial and rather discontinued. So FZ3 will be an instant hit, indeed.

RaaR
500 Command not understood
Posts: 1
Joined: 2004-03-26 19:52

#7 Post by RaaR » 2004-03-26 20:00

Speaking as a linux user who came to this forum hoping to read about filezilla working in linux I have to say this really is going to be an instant success.

gFTP isn't that bad but it's certainly not as good as filezilla.

Keep up the good work!

panfr
503 Bad sequence of commands
Posts: 21
Joined: 2004-03-26 08:56

#8 Post by panfr » 2004-03-27 14:20

@ RaaR: Until Tim releases a usable FZ3 version you can checkout the following (Gftp is IMO a bad client, and Kbear even worse...)
1. Java Network client, from sourceforge. Nice project, nice FTP implementation, but it has certain limitations due to its java nature (the sluggish GUI is the most troublesome), but it is WORKING.
2. jlfxp, again from sourceforge. It looks absolutely like FlashFXP for windows, it is surprisingly fast for a java application, but unfortunately after 1 month of furious development it seems frozen now- and it still has many bugs.
3. IglooFTP-PRO, as I mentioned above- even if it currently pops out at startup "this version is rather old... blah blah...". Resetting the trial period is less than trivial (don't ask me how, please).
Of course I won't comment at all on half assed buggy projects like FTPCube, DeadFTP or Junkie- they are amateurish at the very best.

eddan
226 Transfer OK
Posts: 423
Joined: 2004-02-25 08:44
Location: Norway

#9 Post by eddan » 2004-03-27 14:33

panfr:

By 'Java network client' do you mean 'Java Network Browser' (with their jftp?) http://sourceforge.net/projects/j-ftp/ ? This is probably the best java ftp client there is imo.

Oh, and I think you mean wlfxp and not jlfxp?

panfr
503 Bad sequence of commands
Posts: 21
Joined: 2004-03-26 08:56

#10 Post by panfr » 2004-03-28 13:37

eddan wrote:panfr:

By 'Java network client' do you mean 'Java Network Browser' (with their jftp?) http://sourceforge.net/projects/j-ftp/ ? This is probably the best java ftp client there is imo.

Oh, and I think you mean wlfxp and not jlfxp?
The answer is yes and yes... sorry for my typos.

Post Reply