Pros of aria2

• Core download engine with powerful functionality and high performance
• Supports a wide range of protocols including HTTP, HTTPS, FTP, BitTorrent, and Metalink
• Command-line interface allows for easy integration into scripts and automation

Cons of aria2

• Lacks a built-in graphical user interface
• Can be complex to set up and configure for new users
• Limited visual feedback on download progress without additional tools

Code Comparison

aria2 (C++):

void HttpSkipResponseHeader() {
  status_ = RECV_BODY;
  if (chunkedDecoding_) {
    return;
  }
  auto contentLength = response_->getContentLength();
  if (contentLength == 0) {
    // ...
  }
}

AriaNg (JavaScript):

(function () {
    'use strict';
    angular.module('ariaNg').factory('ariaNgCommonService', ['$location', '$timeout', 'ariaNgConstants', 'ariaNgLocalizationService', function ($location, $timeout, ariaNgConstants, ariaNgLocalizationService) {
        return {
            // ...
        };
    }]);
}());

Note: AriaNg is a web frontend for aria2, so the code comparison is not directly equivalent. AriaNg provides a user-friendly interface to interact with aria2's functionality.

Pros of yaaw

• Lightweight and minimalistic interface
• Supports multiple languages out of the box
• Faster initial loading time due to simpler design

Cons of yaaw

• Less actively maintained (last update in 2017)
• Fewer features and customization options
• Limited mobile device support

Code Comparison

yaaw:

var aria2 = (function() {
    var jsonrpc_interface, jsonrpc_path, jsonrpc_protocol;
    var auth = null;
    var request = function(method, params, success, error) {
        // ... (implementation details)
    };
    // ... (more code)
})();

AriaNg:

(function () {
    'use strict';
    angular.module('ariaNg').factory('aria2RpcService', ['$q', '$timeout', 'ariaNgCommonService', 'ariaNgSettingService', 'ariaNgLogService', function ($q, $timeout, ariaNgCommonService, ariaNgSettingService, ariaNgLogService) {
        var rpcUrl = ariaNgSettingService.getRpcUrl();
        var secret = ariaNgSettingService.getRpcSecret();
        // ... (more code)
    }]);
})();

The code comparison shows that yaaw uses a more traditional JavaScript approach, while AriaNg utilizes AngularJS for its implementation. AriaNg's code structure suggests a more modular and maintainable design, which aligns with its more feature-rich and actively maintained nature.

Pros of webui-aria2

• Simpler and more lightweight interface
• Easier to set up and run, with fewer dependencies
• Supports multiple languages out of the box

Cons of webui-aria2

• Less feature-rich compared to AriaNg
• Not as actively maintained, with fewer recent updates
• Limited customization options for the user interface

Code Comparison

AriaNg uses Angular for its frontend, while webui-aria2 uses jQuery. Here's a brief comparison:

AriaNg (Angular):

@Component({
  selector: 'aria-ng',
  templateUrl: './aria-ng.component.html',
  styleUrls: ['./aria-ng.component.css']
})
export class AriaNgComponent implements OnInit {
  // Component logic
}

webui-aria2 (jQuery):

$(document).ready(function() {
  // jQuery-based logic
  $('#download-form').submit(function(e) {
    e.preventDefault();
    // Handle form submission
  });
});

Both projects aim to provide a web interface for aria2, but they differ in their approach and technology stack. AriaNg offers a more modern and feature-rich experience, while webui-aria2 provides a simpler and more lightweight alternative.

Pros of Persepolis

• Full-featured download manager with a graphical user interface
• Supports multiple protocols including HTTP, FTP, and BitTorrent
• Integrates with browsers via extensions for seamless download management

Cons of Persepolis

• Larger application size and resource footprint
• Requires installation and system dependencies
• Less focused on Aria2 integration compared to AriaNg

Code Comparison

AriaNg (HTML-based interface):

<div class="row">
  <div class="col-md-12">
    <div class="task-table" ng-class="{'draggable': isSupportDragTask()}">
      <table class="table table-hover">
        <!-- Task list table content -->
      </table>
    </div>
  </div>
</div>

Persepolis (Python-based application):

def startAria(self):
    try:
        if not(self.aria2_path):
            self.aria2_path = findAria2()

        args = [self.aria2_path, '--no-conf',
                '--enable-rpc', '--rpc-listen-all',
                '--rpc-listen-port=' + str(self.port),
                '--rpc-max-request-size=2M',
                '--rpc-secret=' + self.aria2_secret]
        # Additional configuration and startup logic
    except Exception as e:
        # Error handling

Summary

AriaNg is a lightweight, web-based frontend for Aria2, while Persepolis is a full-featured download manager with broader protocol support and a native GUI. AriaNg focuses on Aria2 integration, while Persepolis offers a more comprehensive download management solution at the cost of increased complexity and resource usage.

Pros of Aria2-Pro-Docker

• Comes pre-configured with optimized settings for better performance
• Includes additional features like auto-update and HTTPS support
• Easier to deploy and manage in containerized environments

Cons of Aria2-Pro-Docker

• Less flexible for users who want to customize their setup
• May have a larger footprint due to additional features
• Potentially more complex for users unfamiliar with Docker

Code Comparison

AriaNg (HTML-based configuration):

<aria-ng-setting option="maxConcurrentDownloads" default-value="5" min="1" max="16" required></aria-ng-setting>

Aria2-Pro-Docker (Docker-based configuration):

environment:
  - PUID=1000
  - PGID=1000
  - RPC_SECRET=your_secret
  - LISTEN_PORT=6888

Summary

AriaNg is a lightweight, web-based frontend for Aria2, offering flexibility and ease of use. Aria2-Pro-Docker, on the other hand, provides a more comprehensive solution with pre-configured optimizations and additional features, but may be less customizable. The choice between the two depends on the user's specific needs, Docker familiarity, and desired level of control over the configuration.