> As said, IMO, this is not a good point, but the joke is funny :) It's a classic one. > Sure, IRC needs a server and this not. Then the question is for which > reasons MLChat is better than the standard talk? (Please note that I'm > asking for a question from the _user_ point of view, not from a > developer point of view, and, yes, I know that the talk protocol is > orrible ... I'm working on a talk implementation for an exam)
Well it'a far more convenient, in my opinion but i may not be fair... > BTW I'm not against MLChat, but debian is suffering of a bloating > problem regarding the number of packages in the archive, so is probably > better to be sure, before packaging a program, that: I understand. > 1) the program is usefule and not merely a clone of another program Well it is useful, but i don't know it such a program exists yet, or even a better program. It is possible. > 2) the program is effectly used by someon (I'm happy to know that at > INRIA all people use MLChat, but IIRC INRIA is full of RedHat boxes :-)) Yes, RedHat and Mandrakes... but there are some debians like Roberto di Cosmo's box. -- Maxence
