Someone wrote:

"---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 14:54:50 -0800
From: Anonymous User
To: Daniel Stenberg
Subject: My perception of curl

This may be an entirely wrong perception, but having got the
cvs from haxx.se and several downloads at different versions,
I would say that this is a very badly maintained and badly
organised project.

That is not to say that it does not work - when it does work.
For me it does not work and I do not feel that a poorly
maintained source distribution can maintain its status as a
good project in the years that we are about to face.

I hope that you will endeavor to ensure that curl is more
rigourously maintained with respect to both source and
supporting library file in the future."

I hope no one on the developement team is letting this bother them. I've
been building curl from source now for several versions, and I'm also
aware that they provide a number of different flavors of binaries for
those that want to go that route. I've also used the Windows version, and
recommended it to people as a way of downloading stuff off my ftp server
who
may not be as experieced with a standard command-line interactive ftp
client. I've always considered it to be a very well-planned out and
maintained project. Belive me, there are bad ones. This isn't one of them.
Curl comes standard with many a linux distro, and many other top-notice
projects link against libcurl (which I'm assuming is developed by the same
people that develope the command line util) such as PHP and others. I
don't think this would be the case if what this person says was true.

Of course everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but often we put
blame on others when it is our own short-comings that are causing us the
trouble.

-- 
===============================================
After "The Crash", or "Why Not To Trust A 
Distro To Build Your System's C Library"
Up 11:50, 5 users, load average: 3.08,2.25,1.56