At Mon, 26 Jun 2000 05:07:24 +0200 Thomas J. Stens�s ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -
said something about "[amirc] Re: AmIRC 3.5 /mode bug".
> > That's exessive bandwidth usage imho..
>
> Well, is it really? Its already done whenever other modes +/-v and +/-o are
> done, why not when other modes are set on users?
No, It's not... (you could fool amirc before you know)
> And as far as bandwith usage comes into play its not a lot of imho, and
> certainly far from excessive.
> /NAMES dont give that much text back, and since no one complains about
> excessive bandwith usage on mode changes like +/-o and +/-v i wouldnt think
> it would cause more load to have it do /NAMES when modes are changed on
> users.
Ehm this was in the +/-h discussion, you wanted the % there remember?
Isn't that userland?
> Furthermore when modes are changed on users in channels that means in 99% of
> the cases that they have been prefixed with a special char in the userlist
> which wont appear unless a /NAMES is called.
> Now, this would only happen on IRCd's that support it and thus you would
> have no changes whatsoever for users who dont care about it like yourself.
Well i'm only stating what has been said on this ml before, Nothing
else. Supporting every hybrid/variant of the irc protocol is
impossible.
> > well it shows +n and +t (No messaging and topic protection) it just
> > resolves the known modes.
>
> Not quite true.
It is true and you state it below.
> �Mode� Current modes for #OxOnet: no messaging, +r, topic protection,
>
> or raw as it is presented from the server
>
> :irc.oxonet.com 324 ShadowMaster #OxOnet +nrt
>
> AmIRC knows these modes as it gets told whenever you enter a channel.
> It wouldnt be more trouble than having AmIRC grab the mode string raw from
> the server instead of making a mess and using only the ones AmIRC have an
> internally defined name for.
Well, Again, Amirc only supports the RFC.
> > ftp://ftp.vapor.com/pub/amirc/info/rfc1459.txt - The IRC protocol.
> >
> > That is what AmIRC supports, Nothing else.
>
> False statement. AmIRC support dozens of features not specified in the 9
> year old IRC protocol as put forth by Jarkko.
Like?
> > UltimateIRCd is not a standard and the usage of +/-h isn't standard
> > etc, There has been many simular discussions and the answer has always
> > been that amirc will only support the standard IRC protocol.
>
> Hardly ANY ircd out there today is standard by the 9 year old protocol. Its
> something called evolution. There have been many similiar discussions where
> people who apparently have no other objective by discussing issues that
> would improve AmIRC for those who use it and apparently would not affect
> themselves just for the heck of it.
It is true that i wouldn't be affected since i'm on a ircu based
ircnetwork. But that has nothing to do with the statment i made, I
simply told you how it was. If someone did set a new irc standard and
ircservers followed it then there would be a standard to follow
instead of seeing how every ircd works.
> I think i have said this countless of times, and more than once to you
> before. Why on earth should AmIRC not behave like more or less every other
> IRC Client out there and instead of filtering away information from the user
> actually output it to the user. Especially when it would in fact lessen the
> load on AmIRC even though its not much, but apparently people belive it to
> be enough to start crying out in rage once someone asks for features they
> personally dont see the need for and seem to fear will cause AmIRC to start
> using up another meg of their precious memory or eat up a lil second of CPU
> time every once in a while.
Bah, I said that *THAT* was a bug, please *read* the mail.
> Anyhows, AmIRC have added a few features to accomodate f ex IRCnet's IRCd
> which do not follow the RFC either. Channel Mode +I (Auto Invites on IRCnet
> and No Invites on some other ircd's) are supported aswell as Channel Mode +e
> (Excempt bans). AmIRC choose to support silence which isnt specified in the
> RFC but have been supported by AmIRC for as long as i can remember.
Well, Still as i said, it does only 'officially' support the rfc.
> Also as a small note. +/-h is a widly used mode for designating HalfOp's.
> Both by UltimateIRCd, UnrealIRCd and others. I cannot speak for Unreal but
> UltimateIRCd have a registered userbase of 160+ server administrators on a
> wide range of networks, apart from having a current average of between
> 500-1000 downloads per stable release and still growing.
Yes? And on 3-4 other ircd's it might be something completly
different...
> As a second small note you state that:
> "the answer has always been that amirc will only support the standard IRC protocol."
> Which is totally false. Read above and i will also point out the just
> between 3.4 and 3.5 there where changes made to AmIRC to accomodate so
> called non RFC standard features (Silence) and a less recent change the
> addition of color support. Just because YOU concluded with that answer dont
> try and force everyone around you to share that belive.
Hey, I'm just telling you the way it is. If you want to make a change,
Make all the ircnetworks come together and make a updated rfc.
> > (you are however free to write plugins... =))
>
> I shouldnt have to. Its something that should be supported by default
> instead of filtering stuff away.
> Again, even the most basic IRC clients like ircII does not filter stuff out:
> *** Mode change "+h WhoMe" on channel #ShadowRealm by ShadowMaster
Hey, did I say that it was a bug or not?
> If i have been inaccurate on some points please do forgive me. I try not to
> write mails a 5 am, but i have to admitt replies of this sort when people
> ask for feature and someone decides to make some sort of ruling on it when
> they have no right to tends to anger me somewhat.
I'm not making a ruling. I simply stated the fact. There is noway that
ppl can keep up with all ircservers and there is no way that they can
conform to all standards.
> Its ok to voice an opinion, but please dont throw inaccurate and false
> statements around like this. I belive its up to Olli and Jamie to decide
> wheter or not something should be supported or not, and not up to you.
Ehm, I was actually quoting Olli. He stated that in a tread a LONG
time ago and thats how the RFC got to the vapor ftp AFAIR.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yours, Ian Kumlien AcID LanD Is WherE i WaNNa Go!..
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Only AMIGA makes it possible!...
IRC: pOMAc Channels: #AmigaSWE@IrcNET #Amiga, #Main@Arcnet -------------
___________________________________________________________________
AmIRC Mailing List - http://www.vapor.com/amirc/
AmIRC FAQ......: http://faq.vapor.com/amirc/
Listserver Help: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=HELP
Unsubscribe....: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=UNSUBSCRIBE
