hi,
i just think that hackicq is a bad idea...
maybe a better idea would be to put an icq in the contribs that has support
for socks5.
geoff.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2000 7:02 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [Cooker] Licq latest versions
>
>
> David Carvalho wrote:
>
> > [...]
> >
> > omething that mirribleis did on there end to mess
> > > > with us i'm sure, witht he fix though all is back to
> normal. fyi the version included with
> > > > air is very outdated and decrepit compared to the latest
> cvs versions wich have mutli-person
> > > > chat etc.
> > > >
> > > > -DarkWlf
> > >
> > > ok one more post on this...
> > >
> > > If someone will accept me to post the new licq rpms as well
> as the qt2.1 rpms that are needed
> > > for the lastest cvs versions..
> >
> > >
> > > if you wish I will once again upload the srpms for the cvs
> version of licq, and qt2.1beta2
> > > (what would you like the version numbering to be for the cvs
> of licq?? should it be hacklicq?
> > > and date? or the coming release version as in hacklicq-0.77-1mdk?
> >
> > IMHO , Licq is the nicest way to communicate trough the ICQ protocol.
> > It's far away the best clone.
> > At least 90% of Mandrake customers suffer from this Qt 2.02 (or 2.1, for
> > the cvs) + Licq Qt plugin issue. If someone starts this project u
> > described above , I'm pretty sure it will increase the popularity of mdk
> > distro.
> > hacklicq+date would be nice , thus it's constantly in development and
> > many important features and bugfixes (like this AOL trick on Licq
> > clients) , even *unstable*, are only avaiable in the cvs snapshots.
> > And sorry for the terrible english :)
>
> just let Me know if the srpms will be accepted this time and what
> the offical versioning should be
> and i will be happy to post and matain the hacklicq , I would be
> able to do prolly a nightly build
> or something to that affect if needed.
>
> -John
>
>
