On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Kevin L Mitchell wrote:
> No, the point is that this form of MODE message would itself desync the
> client.
And as I said, my point is that the `key text' would not need to be sent
to clients presently in the channel, so the MODE message they receive as
far as the +k is conce
On Tue, 2003-12-02 at 04:48, Jeekay wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Andrew Miller wrote:
> > MODE #channel +ko something +something someop
> > would desync clients - you can't change server-client protocol and not expect
> > problems.
>
> If the text were only sent to clients attempting to join the c
Note to whoever owns the list: Set the Reply-To to the list please :)
On Tue, 2 Dec 2003, Andrew Miller wrote:
> The original mail suggested implementing this as a channel mode. It would need
> to propagate to other servers, and clients(at least chanops) in the channel
> would need to be informed
the topic is for this kind of things, imo. dont add an extra mode for it.
Quoting Jeekay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Andrew Miller wrote:
> > MODE #channel +ko something +something someop
> > would desync clients - you can't change server-client protocol and not
> expect
> > problems.
>
> If the text were only sent to clients attempting to join the chann
On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Andrew Miller wrote:
> MODE #channel +ko something +something someop
> would desync clients - you can't change server-client protocol and not expect
> problems.
If the text were only sent to clients attempting to join the channel, this
is not a problem as the clients currently
