Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Integrate with magnet: URI scheme #256

Open
sonatagreen opened this issue May 27, 2017 · 4 comments
Open

Integrate with magnet: URI scheme #256

sonatagreen opened this issue May 27, 2017 · 4 comments
Labels
kind/discussion Topical discussion; usually not changes to codebase kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature status/blocked/missing-api Blocked by missing API status/deferred Conscious decision to pause or backlog

Comments

@sonatagreen
Copy link
Contributor

sonatagreen commented May 27, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Not all magnet links should be handled through IPFS, but it seems likely possible to offer the option. Maybe something like a protocol handler?
@sonatagreen sonatagreen changed the title Integrate with magnet Integrate with magnet: URI scheme May 27, 2017
@lidel lidel added the kind/discussion Topical discussion; usually not changes to codebase label May 27, 2017
@lidel
Copy link
Member

lidel commented May 27, 2017 •
edited
Loading

@diasdavid any thoughts on this?

I've seen you started work on adding Torrent support to IPFS in ipfs/js-ipfs#779, but got a feeling its too early to have it working end-to-end.

All I was able to found about Torrent and IPFS:

It does not paint coherent picture.
What is the current status/roadmap for torrent support?

@daviddias
Copy link
Member

This sounds like something we can potentially do as soon as torrent support is well tested. It shouldn't take me too long to get something working out of the door, but at the same time, I'm already stretching my time across a multitude of endeavors such as the ipfs-service-worker. I'll come back to this issue once I get back to this feature on js-ipfs.

@lidel lidel added the kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature label Jul 9, 2017
@jeremyBanks jeremyBanks mentioned this issue Aug 29, 2017
Closed
@lidel lidel added the status/blocked/missing-api Blocked by missing API label Oct 14, 2017
@cvan
Copy link

cvan commented Mar 7, 2018

With the recent protocol changes that landed in Firefox, does this change the proposed task items in this issue?

@lidel
Copy link
Member

lidel commented Mar 7, 2018 •
edited
Loading

AFAIK magnet was not prefixed, so recent changes had no impact on this issue.

There was a new WebExtension API introduced in Firefox 54 that enabled us to provide an opt-in handler for magnet URIs (more details in #164 (comment)). So we are good on the API front.

I think this issue is blocked mainly by work that needs to happen in js-ipfs first, namely:

@lidel lidel added the status/deferred Conscious decision to pause or backlog label Sep 22, 2018
@galargh galargh moved this to To do in IPFS-GUI (PL EngRes) Sep 22, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
kind/discussion Topical discussion; usually not changes to codebase kind/enhancement A net-new feature or improvement to an existing feature status/blocked/missing-api Blocked by missing API status/deferred Conscious decision to pause or backlog
Projects
No open projects
IPFS-GUI (PL EngRes)
Status: Needs Grooming
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@lidel @cvan @daviddias @sonatagreen