Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread Carlo Wood
On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 01:38:59PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> The P10 protocol as i know it, > >> SENDERNUM B #channel TS +modes users :%bans > >> doesn't have timestamps for the bans > >> > > > > Like all channel modes, it uses the TS of the channel, there aren't > > TS's on individual

Re: [Coder-Com] X

2002-02-21 Thread Kev
> Hi Undernet Coders! > Is the source on http://gnuworld.sourceforge.net the source to X that = > Undernet is using?=20 > Leon` said something about the new codes there... or? > And are we allowed to use X on our network? (RECNet) > We have some old channel service there now, GWorld or something..

[Coder-Com] X

2002-02-21 Thread Christian Jonassen
Hi Undernet Coders! Is the source on http://gnuworld.sourceforge.net the source to X that Undernet is using? Leon` said something about the new codes there... or? And are we allowed to use X on our network? (RECNet) We have some old channel service there now, GWorld or something It's ju

Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread Isomer
> >> The P10 protocol as i know it, > >> SENDERNUM B #channel TS +modes users :%bans > >> doesn't have timestamps for the bans > >> > > > > Like all channel modes, it uses the TS of the channel, there aren't > > TS's on individual modes, they are just "merged". > > > i know the TS isn't the TS of

Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread steendijk
>> The P10 protocol as i know it, >> SENDERNUM B #channel TS +modes users :%bans >> doesn't have timestamps for the bans >> > > Like all channel modes, it uses the TS of the channel, there aren't > TS's on individual modes, they are just "merged". > i know the TS isn't the TS of the mode... but wh

Re: [Coder-Com] isupport tags

2002-02-21 Thread Isomer
> Hey, > > Just an insignificant suggestion--I thought of a few more ISUPPORT TAGS that > could perhaps be considered: > > > USERMODES= This is available in 004. > KEYLEN= Theres a good argument for this. Currently for some rather obscure reason, it's currently "23" charactors. No idea at

Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread Isomer
> > i guess that those bans were actually *originally* set prior to any > > other BUT ... when you *see* a server SET bans .. it doesn really > > set them at the present moment like if a user did, it is just > > resynchronizing with the list that server has on its side .. I > > guess it just pass

[Coder-Com] isupport tags

2002-02-21 Thread daniel corkill
Hey, Just an insignificant suggestion--I thought of a few more ISUPPORT TAGS that could perhaps be considered: USERMODES= KEYLEN= CHANNAMELEN= I won't bother explaining these tags, as they are obviously self-explanatory. Regards djc

Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread steendijk
> i guess that those bans were actually *originally* set prior to any > other BUT ... when you *see* a server SET bans .. it doesn really > set them at the present moment like if a user did, it is just > resynchronizing with the list that server has on its side .. I > guess it just pass around the

Fwd: Re: [Coder-Com] banlist

2002-02-21 Thread nighty
>Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 11:27:19 +0100 >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: nighty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [Coder-Com] banlist > >At 10:35 21/02/2002 +0100, you wrote: >> > >> > Hi, >> > the two most recent bans (e.g. number 30 and 31) are at the end of >> > your list, you can notice they were

[Coder-Com] banlist: oops...

2002-02-21 Thread steendijk
i sent a reply about banlists to nighty while i wanted to send it to the list. i usually make the kind of errors. maybe nighty can reply it to the list for me.