Is there a real reason a user would want a non registered user to not be able to join, but be able to talk ? I can see the reverse, acting as the +m does now.
I would think, that keeping the dual function on the +r is a good thing, and then simply adding the new +M feature is acceptable. This would also create a single upgrade phase. -- Donnie Michael Poole wrote: > Currently, the +r channel mode has two functions: > - Prevent users without account stamps from joining > - Prevent users without account stamps from talking > > Other ircds split these, so that +r does the first and +M does the > second. > > The reason I resisted doing that in the past is that I did not want to > have channels with +r suddenly allow users to talk who previously > could not. I think an appropriate way to work around this is a > two-phase upgrade: In the first phase, +M would be recognized and both > modes (+r and +M) would prevent non-logged-in users from speaking. In > the second phase, only +M would prevent that. > > Are there any objections to, or other thoughts on, this course? > > Entrope > _______________________________________________ > Coder-com mailing list > Coder-com@undernet.org > http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com > _______________________________________________ Coder-com mailing list Coder-com@undernet.org http://undernet.sbg.org/mailman/listinfo/coder-com
