Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Mon, 27 Sep 2010, Valessio S Brito wrote: > How can we devise problems and find solutions, without doing an > experiment? Freenode already has one, which can be used. If people want one for OFTC[1] they should work with OFTC to create one. > I believe that a web interface facilitates and increases > participation. Example in DebConf10 when he was in the WebChat > http://debianart.org/live (cgiirc on OFTC) Consider yourself volunteered! I'm not against it, I'm just pointing out problems that may not have been foreseen so whoever steps up to do the work can avoid those pitfalls. Don Armstrong 1: There may already be one in existence; I didn't find it with a few minutes of searching, though. -- It was a very familiar voice. [...] It was a voice you could have used to open a bottle of whine. -- Terry Pratchett _The Last Continent_ p270 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100928043619.gw6...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
How can we devise problems and find solutions, without doing an experiment? I think there types of libre #channels and private. Proposal: To access the private channel, the user must have a registred nickname on the OFTC and be nominated by other users who have access to the private channel. Example: #debian-*any*, #debian-people, #debian-local-team, etc. (libre users and anonymous)... #debian-project (private, only with password or invite.) I believe that a web interface facilitates and increases participation. Example in DebConf10 when he was in the WebChat http://debianart.org/live (cgiirc on OFTC) .ValessioBrito Citando Don Armstrong : On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Paul Wise wrote: On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without > coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse > and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. > > #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that > we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without > authentication. Do the freenode webchat users not get assigned the IP address of the user connecting to the web server rather than the IP address of the webserver itself? IIRC for the Indymedia webchat we implemented the former. They get an encoding of the IP which is constant if the official webchat interface is being used. Unfortunately, people tend to use them (and tor) as a mechanism to hide their identity so that they can be a nuisance, and it means that any time we ban someone by IP, we later have to come back and ban their encoded IP on the webchat, etc. My real concern is for uncoordinated webchats, though. We try to keep coordinated ones unbanned in #debian, but if a problem comes from them, we tend to err on silencing them instead. Don Armstrong -- It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -- Frederick Douglass http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- ://ValessioBrito.info Comunicação e Tecnologia mobile: +55 71 VALESSIO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100927224348.10521uwl4vmvh...@ssl.eumx.net
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Sat, 25 Sep 2010, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > > Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without > > coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse > > and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. > > > > #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that > > we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without > > authentication. > > Do the freenode webchat users not get assigned the IP address of the > user connecting to the web server rather than the IP address of the > webserver itself? IIRC for the Indymedia webchat we implemented the > former. They get an encoding of the IP which is constant if the official webchat interface is being used. Unfortunately, people tend to use them (and tor) as a mechanism to hide their identity so that they can be a nuisance, and it means that any time we ban someone by IP, we later have to come back and ban their encoded IP on the webchat, etc. My real concern is for uncoordinated webchats, though. We try to keep coordinated ones unbanned in #debian, but if a problem comes from them, we tend to err on silencing them instead. Don Armstrong -- It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -- Frederick Douglass http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100927210936.gm22...@rzlab.ucr.edu
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:28 AM, Don Armstrong wrote: > Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without > coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse > and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. > > #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that > we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without > authentication. Do the freenode webchat users not get assigned the IP address of the user connecting to the web server rather than the IP address of the webserver itself? IIRC for the Indymedia webchat we implemented the former. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktin=x3huezcv42vzs8aegxylwx6y99gzgypdh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Valessio S Brito wrote: > There is "cgiirc", I think it quite functional. Example run: > http://webchat.freenode.net/ > > Could anyone help with configuration and installation? Almost invariably, web-based chats like this that are launched without coordination with the network that they are talking to lead to abuse and the eventually banning and/or k-lining of involved hosts. #debian routinely bans the webchat on freenode, and I've no doubt that we'll be routinely banning other web chats which are used without authentication. Don Armstrong -- "There are two major products that come out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. We don't believe this to be a coincidence." -- Jeremy S. Anderson http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100823192807.gf17...@teltox.donarmstrong.com
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
There is "cgiirc", I think it quite functional. Example run: http://webchat.freenode.net/ Could anyone help with configuration and installation? The tricky part is configuring the OFTC a higher limit for connections coming from the same host. PS: "Add webchat to your website" is fantastic, possible any site add iframe with url direct to debian teams or channel local debian community, example: "http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=debianart"; Citando Lars Wirzenius : I'm afraid I have idea what it would take to set this up and operate it, though. Does a free software implementation exist? -- ://ValessioBrito.info Comunicação e Tecnologia mobile: +55 71 VALESSIO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100823132921.12576jzxqg7m9...@ssl.eumx.net
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 11:18 AM, Lars Wirzenius wrote: > I'm afraid I have idea what it would take to set this up and operate it, > though. Does a free software implementation exist? There are multiple web-based IRC clients and one or two Java applet ones, the only one available in Debian is cgiirc, which is not very Web 2.0 so is a little less friendly but works in many browsers. -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/aanlktini+z=9pi-apx0bnt6e0-hjhrl2xdiopl1od...@mail.gmail.com
Re: webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
On su, 2010-08-22 at 23:36 -0300, Valessio S Brito wrote: > The proposal is to have something similar to http://webchat.freenode.net/ > > Using cgiirc on webchat.debian.org or irc.debian.org or .net The one place I know that advertises a web IRC gateway is the Koha project (http://koha-community.org/). I asked on their IRC channel, and their experiences have been quite positive. The least sophisticated people are unlikely to have much experience IRC, and probably won't have an IRC client installed, so having a web IRC client will make it easier for them to get help. I'm afraid I have idea what it would take to set this up and operate it, though. Does a free software implementation exist? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1282533528.12989.433.ca...@havelock
webchat/cgiirc on irc.debian.org
Who could help implement an interface/site faster and easier for users and contributors from Debian? Many more people could present this in the channels of the teams related to debian. It would also be an opportunity to help these people get together and do something for the project. The presence of unwanted people (trolls) may come to bother you, but you can have channel "private" or channel operators (@OP) to ban or punish this type of user. The proposal is to have something similar to http://webchat.freenode.net/ Using cgiirc on webchat.debian.org or irc.debian.org or .net This discussion has been raised in debian-www[1], but indicated that perhaps here would be the ideal way to get support. [1] http://old.nabble.com/Re%3A-cgiirc-on-irc.debian.org---p29322246.html -- ://ValessioBrito.info Comunicação e Tecnologia mobile: +55 71 VALESSIO -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-project-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100822233610.17057e8pnlc6i...@ssl.eumx.net
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sun, May 14, 2006 at 07:55:05PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: < snip lots of stupid crap > Can you please stop diverting a potentially useful thread in to the realm of moronic advocacy? kthxbi - David Nusinow -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sunday 14 May 2006 12:23, Anthony Towns wrote: > On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 04:31:16PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Saturday 13 May 2006 16:03, Christoph Berg wrote: > > > Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's > > > > shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and > > > > baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. > > > > Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and > > > > have this discussion again in another few years. > > > > > > If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the > > > network we prefer? > > > > Debian seeks the free choice, right? Jabber is free-er. > > Are you trying to say we should have a jabber.debian.org? Yes. > We already > seem to have a jabber.debian.net, pointing at hades.robster.org. Doesn't count, it's unresponsive. Try browsing to it on Jabber. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpUwwX9C1hwl.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, May 13, 2006 at 04:31:16PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Saturday 13 May 2006 16:03, Christoph Berg wrote: > > Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's > > > shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage > > > OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to > > > another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this > > > discussion again in another few years. > > If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the > > network we prefer? > Debian seeks the free choice, right? Jabber is free-er. Are you trying to say we should have a jabber.debian.org? We already seem to have a jabber.debian.net, pointing at hades.robster.org. (Or, alternatively, Debian seeks to support all sorts of choices, so both IRC and Jabber should be (and are) options) Cheers, aj signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/13/2006 06:42 PM, Noèl Köthe wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 30.04.2006, 19:34 +0100 schrieb Steve McIntyre: > >>I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the >>official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see >>that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to >>the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at >>all. > > oftc support ssl connections (ircs.oftc.net:) so the secret nickserv > and chanserv passwords wouldn't get sniffed via debconf6 wlan.:) Just to add a reference and a "seconded". I checked with Don Armstrong about SSL support in FreeNode and OFTC (because of debconf6 sniffers) and at the moment FreeNode does [1]not support SSL. It is a good argument to move irc.d.o to OFTC (and maybe add ircs.d.o). 1.http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#sslaccess Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) "Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom!" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEZ3/wCjAO0JDlykYRAt6nAJ49GQn5vGbT9h757kL5VILEMQ7aRwCffawm 3CsDmJ9tYE+iz4hNVqAJ+Qw= =UR+/ -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 13 May 2006, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Saturday 13 May 2006 15:12, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > > On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > Most Jabber servers... > > > > topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc > > Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Because it's irc.debian.org not jabber.debian.org nor yourfavoritechatprotocol.debian.org? Because people actually use IRC to discuss Debian related issues? > Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all > the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC > network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets > things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few > years. So why not start up a jabber.debian.net if it doesn't already exist, and see who joins and holds dicsussions there? If you get enough participtation, and there's a reasonable open project to point jabber.debian.org to, I'd imagine it would be an easy case to make. Don Armstrong -- Taxes are not levied for the benefit of the taxed. -- Robert Heinlein _Time Enough For Love_ p250 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 16:03, Christoph Berg wrote: > Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's > > shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage > > OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to > > another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this > > discussion again in another few years. > > If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the > network we prefer? Debian seeks the free choice, right? Jabber is free-er. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpiUSo4Ol6Zv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Re: Paul Johnson 2006-05-14 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's > shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage > OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to > another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion > again in another few years. If you don't care about IRC, why don't you just let us choose the network we prefer? Christoph -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://www.df7cb.de/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 15:12, Yves-Alexis Perez wrote: > On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Most Jabber servers... > > topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc Why does it necessarily have to be IRC? Jabber fixes a lot of IRC's shortcomings, without bringing along all the political drama and baggage OFTC, Freenode, and every other IRC network in existence. Switching to another IRC network just sets things up to repeat and have this discussion again in another few years. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgp01VTEAG42n.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 2006-05-13 at 14:58 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > Most Jabber servers... topic is -irc-.debian.org, iirc -- Yves-Alexis Perez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Saturday 13 May 2006 14:42, Noèl Köthe wrote: > Am Sonntag, den 30.04.2006, 19:34 +0100 schrieb Steve McIntyre: > > I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the > > official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see > > that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to > > the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at > > all. > > oftc support ssl connections (ircs.oftc.net:) so the secret nickserv > and chanserv passwords wouldn't get sniffed via debconf6 wlan.:) Most Jabber servers support or require SSL connections and transparently provides what should have been basic functionality in IRC but ended up tacked on as nickserv and chanserv without having to deal with the insecurity and unreliability of most nickserv and chanserv implementations. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpyLqhya7798.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Am Sonntag, den 30.04.2006, 19:34 +0100 schrieb Steve McIntyre: > I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the > official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see > that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to > the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at > all. oftc support ssl connections (ircs.oftc.net:) so the secret nickserv and chanserv passwords wouldn't get sniffed via debconf6 wlan.:) -- Noèl Köthe Debian GNU/Linux, www.debian.org signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: irc.debian.org
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Since Debian doesn't donate any money to Freenode, I think that the > question of donation spending is not relevant to what network Debian > should choose as its default. Debian donates goodwill and (small?) resources, and exposes its users to the donation requests, by pointing irc.d.o there rather than a saner network, so it is relevant. -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 13:09 +0100, Simon Huggins wrote: > > Since Debian doesn't donate any money to Freenode, I think that the > > question of donation spending is not relevant to what network Debian > > should choose as its default. > > By pointing irc.d.o at freenode, it says "Debian supports freenode's > allocation of funds" implicitly though. That's a matter of opinion not fact, an opinion which I do not share but others of course might. Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, May 06, 2006 at 11:52:00AM +0200, Thijs Kinkhorst wrote: > On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 07:27 +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > > Try asking: how hard is it for project funds to be used to pay > > someone's entire personal mobile phone bill, what would need to > > be disclosed to project supporters and has it ever happened? > I expected this response. I really don't care what is paid with those > funds: it's the responsibility of the people donating to some cause to > make a decision whether they think a phone bill is a good destination > for their money. People having trouble with Freenodes spending habits, > should not donate aswell. I'm not doing it, and it has never hindered > me in using the network. > Since Debian doesn't donate any money to Freenode, I think that the > question of donation spending is not relevant to what network Debian > should choose as its default. By pointing irc.d.o at freenode, it says "Debian supports freenode's allocation of funds" implicitly though. Simon. -- oOoOo "No one - no government agency has jurisdiction over the oOoOo oOoOo truth." - Mulder oOoOo oOoOo oOoOo htag.pl 0.0.22 ::: http://www.earth.li/~huggie/ signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 07:27 +0100, MJ Ray wrote: > "de facto standard" (which is a contradiction anyway) I disagree because I'm using de facto as a modifier to standard, but that's off topic here. > Try asking: how hard is it for project funds to be used to pay > someone's entire personal mobile phone bill, what would need to > be disclosed to project supporters and has it ever happened? I expected this response. I really don't care what is paid with those funds: it's the responsibility of the people donating to some cause to make a decision whether they think a phone bill is a good destination for their money. People having trouble with Freenodes spending habits, should not donate aswell. I'm not doing it, and it has never hindered me in using the network. Since Debian doesn't donate any money to Freenode, I think that the question of donation spending is not relevant to what network Debian should choose as its default. Thijs -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Thijs Kinkhorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Disagree. I'm on some channels for other projects aswell, and they are > all on Freenode. Freenode is the de-facto standard for open source IRC > channels, and moving away from it should only be done for very > compelling reasons. Freenode being barking for years seems compelling to many DDs who already avoid it. Being a "de facto standard" (which is a contradiction anyway) is not a good reason to stay with brokenness. If it was, we should all go use a certain proprietary operating system. > I personally have not had any serious problem with freenode in the > recent past. I guess the main problem with freenode would stem from > quite some years ago. Time has passed and Freenode improved. No, it has not, in several ways. > Of course one can find a problem with any network, just as OFTC has its > problems too. To give an example, when trying to connect recently, I > discovered that there isn't even a server list available on their > website (quite basic information), and that irc.eu.oftc.net does not > connect you to a European server. So connect to irc.oftc.net and ask it for the server list. Unlike freenode, OFTC has not disabled this basic feature. It's current and up-to-date, unlike a web page. I think using IRC's features is far better than having to fire up a client for a different protocol and go hunting in a non-standard location. > > On another front, oftc is also a sister org under the SPI > > umbrella. > > What advantage does the same umbrella bring in choosing an IRC network? We know it is run in the public interest and has basic openness. Try asking: how hard is it for project funds to be used to pay someone's entire personal mobile phone bill, what would need to be disclosed to project supporters and has it ever happened? To summarise: Freenode is big but broken and opaque, but OFTC is run for aims more similar to debian and many DDs are already there. -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Don Armstrong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > What aspects of Debian development warrant private conversations? > > > > Introductions, misunderstandings and conflict resolution. > > None of these encompass development even though they may facilitate > it. "Debian is about a lot more than just packaging software and maintaining those packages." [Debian Developer's Reference] > > The first time I noticed this (the +q lunacy), the attitude seemed > > to be that IRC clients should change to cope with freenode, not that > > freenode should cope with clients. > > +q is just one way of specifying the ban; the actual ban is > implemented as a +b with special syntax. The problem is not with the specification: it's with how it makes the server send unhelpful or confusing responses to clients. It happened with +q, it happened with NOIDPRIVMSG, it happened with the channel-redirecting bans, and it probably happens still with other things. The network attitude seems to be that this is entirely a client-side problem, never mind that the server responses are variously unreasonable or incomplete. -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: usable console jabber-clients? (was: irc.debian.org)
On Wed, 03 May 2006 17:02:40 +0200, Cord Beermann wrote: > Name them please, maybe i missed them. I use every day emacs-jabber (superb, but unfo not in Debian), also I like very much imcom (unfo, removed recently from Debian). Others like freetalk and cabber have still a long way to go. Some console IM clients such as centericq also have Jabber support, although I haven't tried them. Among the GUI clients the best in respect to GC is Gajim, IMO. -- Yavor Doganov -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 05/02/2006 12:40 PM, Cord Beermann wrote: > Hallo! Du (Paul Johnson) hast geschrieben: >> Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these >> days >> than IRC. > > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. for the usual one > to one communication it might be ok, but for groupchat (and thats what > most people do on IRC it simply sucks. Hmmm... there is always bitlbee. :) It is not a Jabber client, but allows someone to use any irc client to connect to IM networks (like Jabber, GTalk, ICQ). And BTW, switch to Jabber does not determines where irc.debian.org should point to (unless we drop it, which is non-sense). IMHO, having Jabber is another point and discussing it should be dropped on this thread. Maybe, create a wiki page with reasons to move and to not move could help us to check the points (pros and cons) and decide which is better for our users and, of course, for us. Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) "Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom!" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEWVw3CjAO0JDlykYRAtlLAKDGLWXdY6Whnh0m0xzozqMkeyOBKgCeLsZD Bj8FFab4cFFnKkzFzlq3hKc= =ryXr -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:41:35AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >I'm in favour as well. > I wonder, do you and the other "me too" people also have a reason to > justify switching? I'm in favour of moving irc.debian.org just as I was last time this came up because of Rob Levin's appalling treatment of #brits back at the time he started the messages begging for money so he could fund his IRC habit as a full time job. OFTC has a constitution and people are elected into roles. See http://www.oftc.net/oftc/Constitution Freenode has an opaque dictatorship run by Rob Levin. Simon. -- UK based domain, email and web hosting ***/ "AAAhhh, I see you have the /* http://www.blackcatnetworks.co.uk/ **/ Machine that goes ping." /** [EMAIL PROTECTED] */ /*** Black Cat Networks / / signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Linas Žvirblis wrote: > Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > What does +s exactly do? Many more channels have this, #debian-qa and > > #debian.de on OFTC too. So your list is incomplete right now. > > +s stands for "secret". It means that the channel will not be seen on > channel list. It also makes it impossible to tell if a person is on the > channel, unless you are on it yourself. Both #debian-devel are +s and yet they are hardly "secret". The +s is mostly used to avoid being annoyed by random people and is apparently regularly used for development channels (where interested people know the existence of the channel via something else than /list). I don't know if this is a good policy but it looks like many people like it for various reasons like avoiding spam-bots and similar privacy concerns. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Raphael Hertzog wrote: > What does +s exactly do? Many more channels have this, #debian-qa and > #debian.de on OFTC too. So your list is incomplete right now. +s stands for "secret". It means that the channel will not be seen on channel list. It also makes it impossible to tell if a person is on the channel, unless you are on it yourself. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Jorgen Schaefer wrote: > Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > You also forgot #debian-women on oftc which currently has 79. > > As I said, this list does not include private or secret channels, > and #debian-women has +s set. What does +s exactly do? Many more channels have this, #debian-qa and #debian.de on OFTC too. So your list is incomplete right now. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Don Armstrong wrote: > > Hmm, you seem to have missed #debian-boot, which is on freenode with > > some 70 in channel. Also, you missed #debian-security and #debian-release, > > which are, IIRC, on OFTC. > > For whatever reason, those channels appear to be +s, so it's not > surprising that they were missed... > > 11:56:52 -!- mode/#debian-security [+nsc] > 11:56:52 -!- Channel #debian-security created Tue Aug 30 08:58:25 2005 > 11:56:57 -!- mode/#debian-release [+nsc] > 11:56:57 -!- Channel #debian-release created Sun Feb 6 18:55:01 2005 AFAIK all three channels are intended to be open to the public, so that should probably be changed. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Joey Hess wrote: > Jorgen Schaefer wrote: > > So, here it goes. Data was collected on 2006-05-03 at around 18:40 > > CEST: > > Hmm, you seem to have missed #debian-boot, which is on freenode with > some 70 in channel. Also, you missed #debian-security and #debian-release, > which are, IIRC, on OFTC. For whatever reason, those channels appear to be +s, so it's not surprising that they were missed... 11:56:52 -!- mode/#debian-security [+nsc] 11:56:52 -!- Channel #debian-security created Tue Aug 30 08:58:25 2005 11:56:57 -!- mode/#debian-release [+nsc] 11:56:57 -!- Channel #debian-release created Sun Feb 6 18:55:01 2005 Don Armstrong -- She was alot like starbucks. IE, generic and expensive. -- hugh macleod http://www.gapingvoid.com/batch3.htm http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Joey Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Jorgen Schaefer wrote: >> So, here it goes. Data was collected on 2006-05-03 at around 18:40 >> CEST: > > Hmm, you seem to have missed #debian-boot, which is on freenode with > some 70 in channel. Also, you missed #debian-security and #debian-release, > which are, IIRC, on OFTC. Thanks for pointing these out - as I said, the lists do not include secret channels (channel mode +s), and all three of them do have that mode set. The list was generated with the LIST command, which does not include secret channels. Regards, -- Jorgen -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.forcix.cx/ pgp2OKs3A0uRE.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Kurt Roeckx <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > You also forgot #debian-women on oftc which currently has 79. As I said, this list does not include private or secret channels, and #debian-women has +s set. Greetings, -- Jorgen -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.forcix.cx/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 06:49:47PM +0200, Jorgen Schaefer wrote: > Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Right now I'm on those Debian related channels on OFTC: > > [...] > > And on Freenode: > > [...] > > * Freenode [...] > 6 #debian-women > > * OFTC: You also forgot #debian-women on oftc which currently has 79. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Jorgen Schaefer wrote: > So, here it goes. Data was collected on 2006-05-03 at around 18:40 > CEST: Hmm, you seem to have missed #debian-boot, which is on freenode with some 70 in channel. Also, you missed #debian-security and #debian-release, which are, IIRC, on OFTC. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Raphael Hertzog <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Right now I'm on those Debian related channels on OFTC: > [...] > And on Freenode: > [...] I'm not advocating Freenode really (I couldn't care less about where any #*debian* channel buffer points, really), but if we list channels on the networks, we should use complete lists. What follows is a full list of channels with the string "debian" in them, together with user numbers, on both networks. Beware. Users DO overlap, so take the numbers with a grain of salt. Also this does not include private or secret channels, and this will probably change tremendously if irc.debian.org points to oftc. If anyone feels so inclined, ey can provide a similar list for Jabber, too. So, here it goes. Data was collected on 2006-05-03 at around 18:40 CEST: * Freenode 789 #debian 168 #debian.de 103 #debian-fr 89 #debian-es 82 #debian-amd64 73 #debian-russian 69 #debian.se 69 #debian-mentors 46 #debian-kde 43 #debian.hu 43 #debian-bugs 40 #debian-edu 34 #debian-offtopic 29 #debian-zh 28 #debian-java 25 #debian-arm 24 #debian-devel-fr 24 #debian_ 23 #debian-it 23 #debian-glibc 23 #debianfr 22 #emdebian 17 #debian-pr 16 #debian-x 16 #debian-ve 15 #debian-mono 15 #debian-bots 14 #debianmexico 14 #debian-br-cdd 13 #debian-xfce 13 #debian-uy 13 #debian-co 13 #debian-ar 12 #debian-custom 11 #debian-ruby 10 #debian-sparc 10 #debian-peru 10 #debian-muc 10 #debian-france 10 #debian-de 10 #debian-catalan 9 #debian.dk 9 #debian-bleh 8 #debian-user-french 8 #debian-sp 8 #debian-mg 8 #debian-ipv6 7 #debian-oo 7 #debian-mentors-ops 7 #debian-ia64 6 #debian-women 6 #debian-qa 6 #debian-overflow 6 #debian-hurd 5 #debian.tr 5 #debian-rj 5 #debian-nonfree 5 #debianitas 5 #debian-cr 4 #debian-rs 4 #debian-pt 4 #debian-np 4 #debian-mentors-es 4 #debian-jr 4 #debian.gr 4 #debian-ce 4 #debian-anarchy * OFTC: 69 #debian-uk 65 #debian 44 #debian-kernel 36 #debian-devel-fr 28 #debian-bugs 19 #debian.or.at 16 #debian-amd64 15 #debian-mirrors 15 #debian-fr 14 #debian-lists 14 #debian-i18n 13 #debian-xen 11 #debian-python 11 #debian-l10n-fr 9 #debian-soc 7 #debian-apache 6 #debian-cd 5 #debian-live 4 #debian-webapps 3 #debian-gis 2 #debian-svn 2 #debian-social 2 #debian-mujeres 2 #debian-br 2 #debian-boot 1 #debian-xfce 1 #debian.se 1 #debian-ops 1 #debian-l10n-spanish 1 #debian-edu 1 #debian-bots 1 #debian-alsa 1 #alsa-debian Greetings, -- Jorgen -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.forcix.cx/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >The people who are on Freenode are there because it's irc.debian.org but > >they don't care if it's Freenode or not. > How do you know? Because I discussed with them... the initial plan was to move #debian-devel-fr from Freenode to OFTC, but not everybody followed so we ended up with the channel on both networks. I asked them why they didn't follow and they told me that they want to be on irc.debian.org because it's a Debian related channel. Roland Mas, Sébastien Bacher and several other people argumented in that way. > >I can also understand that some people prefer Freenode for historical > >reasons but if you try to get the best for Debian, you can only understand > >that it's important to have all people in a common place. And the more > >consensual (or better said, the less-controversial) place right now is OFTC. > Hardly. Start a poll if you want to convince me otherwise. I'm on both network and I'll stay on both networks after the change as well... but I definitely want all official Debian channels on a single network. Right now I'm on those Debian related channels on OFTC: #debian-tech #debian-devel #debian-cd #alioth #debian-devel-fr #debian.de #debian-release #debian-women #debian-python #debian-qa #debian-soc And on Freenode: #debian-devel #debian-boot #debian-devel-fr #debian-mentors The facts are that most recent Debian-related channels have been created on OFTC. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Wouter Verhelst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: >> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote: >> > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these >> > > days than IRC. >> > >> > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. >> >> So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. > > As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think > people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a > client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first > place. Because IRC clients are really, really nice, and Jabber clients are not (I don't know of any Jabber client I consider usable, the same for ICQ and the other IM services - I dislike licq, for example), the best option to get us incorrigible IRC freaks onto Jabber would be to improve bitlbee so it works with all features of Jabber. Oh, wait. I use bitlbee already. And it does have Jabber support (thought not optimal). But I never bothered to get a Jabber account. Let me think of why. *ponder* Oh, right, I never met anyone with a Jabber account that wasn't on IRC most of the time. But that's probably just because we IRC geeks form a single Jabber-hostile group. Greetings, -- Jorgen -- Debian GNU/Linux Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.forcix.cx/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
usable console jabber-clients? (was: irc.debian.org)
Hallo! Du (Paul Johnson) hast geschrieben: >All the concole Jabber clients I've come across suit me fine. I can't program >for a variable that I can't perceive. Name them please, maybe i missed them. Cord -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Hallo! Du (Paul Johnson) hast geschrieben: >> Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. > >So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. sorry. out of skills. (beside that that would be on my todo-list the point behind 'rewriting nn') Btw, there was an irssi-plugin for jabber, but that didn't implement groupchat, and it looks like the development has been discontinued. bts#188465 >> for the usual one >> to one communication it might be ok, but for groupchat (and thats what >> most people do on IRC it simply sucks. >By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like spamming >the channel to announce they're going away, or indicating their status with >nicknames (which also spams the channel). You also get spammed on IRC >whenever someone joins or leaves a channel. Jabber prevents this by >providing a real presence system. Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC >does in group chat, except bans actually work because they're not stupidly >tied to some arbitrary netmask. Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't >spammed to the channel unless your client adds them in for you (but changes >are still reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). Jabber networks >don't go on begging sprees for funding. OFTC will invariably spam you like >every other IRC network since the dawn of time the first moment they get more >than a few users. You don't need to tell me what jabber is. I deployed and run it on our company-network, to get cow-orkers away from Yahoo/AIM/MSN/... IM-Services, so internal information has a better chance to be internal ;-) My experience is that there isn't a useable Textual Client (there are a few, but they don't have groupchat implemented), and the graphical ones (GAIM, PSI) implement some things but are not complete. So with psi it isn't possible to configure Groupchat, Gaim can't discover Services, and if you are Operator of the thing, you need tkabber, which falls short on some other nice-to-haves (iirc it crashes after some time). (as a footnote, my irssi-client usually has nearly the same uptime as the box it runs on.) So, until there isn't a stable and complete free-as-in-speech client-implementation jabber isn't ready to provide the recommended online way to get help for Debian. >IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still plagued >by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of improvement over >time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world moved on already? the world won't. (and Windows is still there, even if The Hurd would be released before Vista) So you want us to moving on to something that is worse than the current (yes, 20 year old) technology, only because it is old? Maybe it simply provides all that is needed? If it wouldn't people really moved on as some did, for example on the Webserver-Sector. (btw: did you notice that http and smtp is already over 10 years old. Time to replace it?). personally, i would prefer Psyc (http://psyc.pages.de) as the successor of irc. at least because it provides a functional irc-client-interface (and jabber, and web, and) and brings the good things of IRC and Jabber (and some more IM-thingies) together. Sadly there's only one free-as-in-beer server yet (you are not allowed to use the underlying ldmud for commercial things) Cord -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wednesday 03 May 2006 01:19, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote: > > > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > > > > these days than IRC. > > > > > > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. > > > > So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. > > As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think > people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a > client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first > place. can you give a good enough definition of 'non-sucking' to allow that? > Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to > everyone I've ever chatted with? it doesn't: - your presence only gets broadcasts to people you've explicitly authorized to subscribe to your presence (and you can de-authorize people at any time) - furthermore you can actually selectively send your presence to people, allowing you to present different presences-modes to different people at the same time. -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgphj0rDmTMez.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >The people who are on Freenode are there because it's irc.debian.org but >they don't care if it's Freenode or not. How do you know? >I can also understand that some people prefer Freenode for historical >reasons but if you try to get the best for Debian, you can only understand >that it's important to have all people in a common place. And the more >consensual (or better said, the less-controversial) place right now is OFTC. Hardly. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 04:55:15PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 16:19, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > > As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think > > people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a > > client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first > > place. > > All the concole Jabber clients I've come across suit me fine. I can't > program for a variable that I can't perceive. Granted. And since I don't use (nor want) non-graphic jabber clients myself, I'll leave it at that. > > > > for the usual one to one communication it might be ok, but for > > > > groupchat (and thats what most people do on IRC it simply sucks. > > > > > > By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like > > > spamming the channel to announce they're going away, > > > > That's not really the design of IRC; rather, it's the design of some > > clients. > > It's a misfeature in clients caused by the bad design of IRC: It lacks > presence information, which people do find important. Just not > channelworthy. So use a client that doesn't suck, and that doesn't spam your channel. It's possible. > > > or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the > > > channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or > > > leaves a channel. > > > > Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to > > like them. > > s/most/none/. I just tried irssi, ircii, kopete, and ejabberd's IRC > clients. None have this. I don't know all clients, but irssi surely does. As does xchat, which, rather than irssi, is my personal irc-client of choice. You need to ignore some messages (see Joerg's post for an explanation of how that's done). Note that if you ignore them, in xchat that means they don't appear in the chat window, not that the list of people on the channel isn't updated. > > > Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. > > > > IRC has a real presence system, too. > > An /away command nobody uses doesn't a presence system make. So use auto-away, which at least irssi and xchat do support (and probably every reasonably modern IRC client on the planet). > > > Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel > > > unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still > > > reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). > > > > Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know > > why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those. > > Because nobody changes their nicknames on IRC anymore, it's always from > something like "retard" to "retard-doingMyWife" or something similarly > presence-related. I don't understand why people like to change their nicknames I do Explain? Well, it's sometimes nice, especially if you want to confuse people > > > Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding. > > > > Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some > > "please support my bandwidth" request in the past. > > Switch servers. You can still get to the same group chats from any Jabber > server. So far, that one Jabber admin that doesn't quite get it out of > dozens. Yeah, and I can go ahead and ask everyone in my list of contact to go and please update their contact list. Thanks, but no thanks. [...] > > > IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still > > > plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of > > > improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world > > > moved on already? > > > > Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to > > everyone I've ever chatted with? > > Jabber doesn't do that, nor am I sure I understand where you get that > impression. You have to explicitly authorize people to subscribe to your > presence information, it's not something that gets broadcast to other users > without your approval. Okay, so perhaps I was being a bit too much of a smartass here. Still, there are times when I would want to use IRC when I don't want to reveal to my brother or whoever that I'm online. Sure, some clients allow me to do just that, but it's not the default. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Le Mer 3 Mai 2006 11:58, Thijs Kinkhorst a écrit : > Summarizing: I do not see how changing the default network would > improve Debian's IRC channels, but it would separate the Debian > channels from the much larger base of open source channels on > Freenode. that's not a valid point IMHO. every irc client on earth knows how to deal with multiple servers. So after that, the fact that a channel is on that or this server is not a big deal, since channels don't cooperate anyway, so you still are able to go to #your_prefeded_FOSS_project on Freenode and on #debian on OFTC. The current problem I have with the OFTC/Freenode Pair is that we have valuables channels on both networks, and that sucks: where to find: - #alioth ? OFTC - #debian-devel ? both - #debian-kde ? Freenode - #debian-release ? OFTC - ... and *that* is the problem I have with debian atm, because it's hard to know where channels are. I personnally don't care if all go to Freenode or OFTC, it's only a matter of consistency -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O[EMAIL PROTECTED] OOOhttp://www.madism.org pgpWHJHqHCzvv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sun, 2006-04-30 at 19:34 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the > official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see > that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to > the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at > all. Disagree. I'm on some channels for other projects aswell, and they are all on Freenode. Freenode is the de-facto standard for open source IRC channels, and moving away from it should only be done for very compelling reasons. I personally have not had any serious problem with freenode in the recent past. I guess the main problem with freenode would stem from quite some years ago. Time has passed and Freenode improved. Of course one can find a problem with any network, just as OFTC has its problems too. To give an example, when trying to connect recently, I discovered that there isn't even a server list available on their website (quite basic information), and that irc.eu.oftc.net does not connect you to a European server. > On another front, oftc is also a sister org under the SPI > umbrella. What advantage does the same umbrella bring in choosing an IRC network? Summarizing: I do not see how changing the default network would improve Debian's IRC channels, but it would separate the Debian channels from the much larger base of open source channels on Freenode. thanks, Thijs signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: irc.debian.org
On 10643 March 1977, Paul Johnson wrote: >> > or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the >> > channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or >> > leaves a channel. >> Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to >> like them. > s/most/none/. I just tried irssi, ircii, kopete, and ejabberd's IRC clients. > > None have this. That shows that you dont know what you did, probably due to your Jabber-love :) Ignorance List: #achannel: JOINS PARTS QUITS #anotherchan: JOINS PARTS QUITS The ignorance system works very well for that. Type /help levels in irssi to see what else you could ignore. I have a jabber account (and an own server) and use that also, but i wouldnt ever want to have groupchats there. or to drop IRC. IRC is just soo much better than Jabber for most things I want to get done online, talking with others... -- bye Joerg It seems to me that the account creation step could be fully automated: checking the box "approved by DAM" could trigger an insert into the LDAP database thereby creating the account. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pgptWta0RaZIx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I'm in favour as well. > I wonder, do you and the other "me too" people also have a reason to > justify switching? Yes I'm tired to have #debian-devel-fr on both networks with less than 30 people on each. The people who are on OFTC are dissatisfied with Freenode and don't want to come back to Freenode. The people who are on Freenode are there because it's irc.debian.org but they don't care if it's Freenode or not. If irc.d.o points to OFTC, we will again have a single (much more useful) #debian-devel-fr ... So count me as a "mee too" in this thread, I just want to re-unify the community behind a single network. The fact that OFTC is SPI-affiliated make that change quite natural and logical. I can also understand that some people prefer Freenode for historical reasons but if you try to get the best for Debian, you can only understand that it's important to have all people in a common place. And the more consensual (or better said, the less-controversial) place right now is OFTC. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:38:37AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >The problem is that the high amount of disconnection one gets from freenode > >makes this a pain, especially as it is not clear for clients like irssi when > Do you? This is unusual, I have clients connected to freenode for many > weeks at a time. Maybe we should discuss this offline to better debug > which kind of issues you are having. Ok, but i have thought about this yesterday, and i believe the problem is that both on oftc and on freenode, not everyone is affected the same by a split. Those who stay on the good side of the split don't see a problem, while those on the bad side, ... It may also be related on the number of channels you are on and stuff like that. > >you are allowed to post or not, as the error message does not appear in the > >/query channel, but in the log one, and it doesn't even specify who you tried > >to /query and was blocked. > I have always considered this an irssi misfeature. :-) > (Anyway, it can be easily corrected.) Sure. Let's file a bug report against this :) > >You mentioned some auto-identify scripts, care to give an example of how that > >would work and respond to both above problems ? > The purpose of such a script is to automatically identify you to > nickserv at connection time. Actually, you do not even need a script for > freenode: just configure your client to use the nickserv password as the > server password (if you use irssi: /help server). > This is documented in the network FAQs, in the section "What's the > easiest way to identify to nickserv when I connect to freenode?": > http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#identify . Yeah, the thing is, i use (like probably most DDs) the irc channels without really being an expert, and without wanting to loose long hours reading badly accessible documentation (and freenode is as bad as oftc on this account, despite some claiming it is better). This is i believe normal, and whatever network is chosen, it should be easily usable out of the box, without initiatic knowledge :) > >Also, i guess that if you allow none-reg /querying, this leaves you open to > >wide amount of irc-spam that has been circulating in freenode, and supposedly > >oftc is (still) less vulnerable to this. > Currently spam is not a major issue. OFTC AFAIK is currently not a > target of turkish kiddies, but this could change any day like it > happened to freenode. Indeed. The sheer size of freenode makes it a tempting target though. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >i would be interested in the number of netsplits. do you have a diagram >for that, too? No, but empirically it appears to me that OFTC splits at least as often (and is 10 times smaller than freenode). -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, 03 May 2006, MJ Ray wrote: > Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > One might think private messages are useful in user support, but > > #debian actually has a channel policy asking users not to send > > them without permission. [...] > > So, one might think the current #debian is not actually as useful in > user support as it could be? You may have that opinion, but the rule has been put in place because far too often people ask for help from one volunteer, and the volunteer leaves to get on with their real life then the person getting help has to repeat everything that they've said to a new helper. It also makes it more difficult for the channel to see the help that users are getting, and make corrections or pitch in and help. That said, you can ask to /msg someone privately, and if they agree, they'll help you in /msg... but the default assumption is to keep the conversation in the channel. > > What aspects of Debian development warrant private conversations? > > Introductions, misunderstandings and conflict resolution. None of these encompass development even though they may facilitate it. > The first time I noticed this (the +q lunacy), the attitude seemed > to be that IRC clients should change to cope with freenode, not that > freenode should cope with clients. +q is just one way of specifying the ban; the actual ban is implemented as a +b with special syntax. /quote MODE #foo +q [EMAIL PROTECTED] is equivalent to /quote MODE #foo +b [EMAIL PROTECTED] (and it's not like that even matters, because casual users won't be using them anyway... and if you're in a position to use them and don't like them, you can always use +b) I personally haven't seen a client that had a problem with it... but given the way that some IRC clients are written, it wouldn't suprise me much. Don Armstrong -- The beauty of the DRUNKENNESS subprogram was that you could move your intoxication level up and down at will, instead of being caught on a relentless down escalator to bargain basement philosophy and the parking garage. -- Rudy von Bitter _Software_ p124 http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Peter Samuelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > One might think private messages are useful in user support, but > #debian actually has a channel policy asking users not to send them > without permission. [...] So, one might think the current #debian is not actually as useful in user support as it could be? > And as for Debian development, I receive even fewer private messages > related to that. Do the rest of you? No, I receive fewer public than private messages about debian development. I don't often connect to debian IRC channels, though. > What aspects of Debian development warrant private conversations? Introductions, misunderstandings and conflict resolution. The outcomes should be public, but it is not always as effective for the conversations to be. > [...] it just surprises me that people other than really heavy IRC > users would even notice the effect of this freenode default. Oh, it's fairly noticeable if you try to move an email discussion to IRC and you start getting error messages returned, but part of the problem is that not all clients handle the effect of freenode defaults well. The first time I noticed this (the +q lunacy), the attitude seemed to be that IRC clients should change to cope with freenode, not that freenode should cope with clients. > Not that > it's exactly a _secret_ - I mean, the information is one click away > =66rom http://freenode.net/ (the link mysteriously titled "using the > network"). freenode differs from normal IRC too much. It's unsurprising if users don't notice the small changes until they bite, even if they are documented on a different protocol. -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 01:50:41AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I'm talking about well after the OFTC formation. If there are that many > >people dissatisfied with freenode, it seems likely that there are > How many? Let's add some data to the thread: i would be interested in the number of netsplits. do you have a diagram for that, too? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
> I wonder, do you and the other "me too" people also have a reason to > justify switching? How about "Rob Levin is still alive"? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I'm talking about well after the OFTC formation. If there are that many >people dissatisfied with freenode, it seems likely that there are How many? Let's add some data to the thread: http://irc.netsplit.de/cgi-bin/ncompare.cgi?n1=freenode&n2=OFTC The multi-year graphs better show the respective growths: http://irc.netsplit.de/networks/details.php?net=freenode&point=years http://irc.netsplit.de/networks/details.php?net=OFTC&point=years -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 16:19, Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote: > > > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > > > > these days than IRC. > > > > > > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. > > > > So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. > > As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think > people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a > client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first > place. All the concole Jabber clients I've come across suit me fine. I can't program for a variable that I can't perceive. > > > for the usual one to one communication it might be ok, but for > > > groupchat (and thats what most people do on IRC it simply sucks. > > > > By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like > > spamming the channel to announce they're going away, > > That's not really the design of IRC; rather, it's the design of some > clients. It's a misfeature in clients caused by the bad design of IRC: It lacks presence information, which people do find important. Just not channelworthy. > > or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the > > channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or > > leaves a channel. > > Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to > like them. s/most/none/. I just tried irssi, ircii, kopete, and ejabberd's IRC clients. None have this. > > Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. > > IRC has a real presence system, too. An /away command nobody uses doesn't a presence system make. > > Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC does in group chat, except > > bans actually work because they're not stupidly tied to some arbitrary > > netmask. > > Well, there's one "advantage". > > > Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel > > unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still > > reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). > > Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know > why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those. Because nobody changes their nicknames on IRC anymore, it's always from something like "retard" to "retard-doingMyWife" or something similarly presence-related. > > Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding. > > Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some > "please support my bandwidth" request in the past. Switch servers. You can still get to the same group chats from any Jabber server. So far, that one Jabber admin that doesn't quite get it out of dozens. > > OFTC will invariably spam you like every other IRC network since the > > dawn of time the first moment they get more than a few users. > > As it is, that hasn't happened yet. Can we talk about things that are > actually happening, rather than things that *might* happen at some point > in the undefined future, please? So OFTC is the one IRC network that does get it so far. Good for them. Don't expect it to last. > > IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still > > plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of > > improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world > > moved on already? > > Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to > everyone I've ever chatted with? Jabber doesn't do that, nor am I sure I understand where you get that impression. You have to explicitly authorize people to subscribe to your presence information, it's not something that gets broadcast to other users without your approval. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpmksSvsbfKp.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I'm in favour as well. I wonder, do you and the other "me too" people also have a reason to justify switching? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
I don't have a dog in this hunt, but some of the characterizations here were a bit off so I thought I should point out some misconceptions. Wouter Verhelst wrote: > On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: >> Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. > IRC has a real presence system, too. Hardly. It has "away", yes, but that's hardly a real/full presense system. Jabber, being a real presence system, allows someone's presence to be unobtrusively signaled (ie, not in channel, but still proactively shown). IRC has no such capability, either its reactive (when I send a message or do a whois or related, I get indication of it) or it spams the channel. (Yes, I use IRC regularly, the presense capabilities in Jabber are tremendously better than those found in IRC) >> Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel >> unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still >> reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). > Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know > why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those. I don't want them spammed into the channel, but they should be reflected in a visible way, ie, out of band of the channel. >> Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding. > Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some > "please support my bandwidth" request in the past. Then switch servers. Because of open federation, its unlikely you'll lose access to any of the resources (ie, chatrooms and other stuff) that you had access to previously. None of the annoying silo's that you get with IRC networks (unless you consider AIM vs Yahoo! vs MSN, but I don't think that's much of an issue here). >> IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still >> plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of >> improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world >> moved on already? > Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to > everyone I've ever chatted with? 1) you can remove subscription presence from a user 2) in some clients you can log in without announcing presence as well, though I will acknowledge that its less useful that way > Thanks, but no thanks. Jabber has its place as an IM protocol, but not > as a group chat thing; IRC is way better there. Suffice it to say, I strongly disagree. Jabber has *much* better mechanisms for supporting group chat scenarios. Perhaps there aren't any clients that you like for group chatting in IRC, I won't argue that...but please don't say that the protocol isn't as adapted to it because Jabber has much better capabilities, they just need to be exposed in the clients if they aren't there already. -- Jeff McAdams "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." -- Benjamin Franklin signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >The problem is that the high amount of disconnection one gets from freenode >makes this a pain, especially as it is not clear for clients like irssi when Do you? This is unusual, I have clients connected to freenode for many weeks at a time. Maybe we should discuss this offline to better debug which kind of issues you are having. >you are allowed to post or not, as the error message does not appear in the >/query channel, but in the log one, and it doesn't even specify who you tried >to /query and was blocked. I have always considered this an irssi misfeature. :-) (Anyway, it can be easily corrected.) >You mentioned some auto-identify scripts, care to give an example of how that >would work and respond to both above problems ? The purpose of such a script is to automatically identify you to nickserv at connection time. Actually, you do not even need a script for freenode: just configure your client to use the nickserv password as the server password (if you use irssi: /help server). This is documented in the network FAQs, in the section "What's the easiest way to identify to nickserv when I connect to freenode?": http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#identify . >Also, i guess that if you allow none-reg /querying, this leaves you open to >wide amount of irc-spam that has been circulating in freenode, and supposedly >oftc is (still) less vulnerable to this. Currently spam is not a major issue. OFTC AFAIK is currently not a target of turkish kiddies, but this could change any day like it happened to freenode. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I'm thinking that what he's *really* saying is "there're so many people >whom I can't talk to this way that it's almost impossible". Which is hard to believe since he is a registered user who configured his account to receive messages from unregistered users and so is not limited in any way. I wonder if I am still missing something. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 15:52 -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like > spamming > the channel to announce they're going away, or indicating their status > with > nicknames (which also spams the channel). If *users* announce they're away, it'll be spam no matter if it's in an IRC channel or on Jabber. And I've seen a lot more people announcing their status in their IM-nickname than is their IRC-nickname (9 chars for nick pwnz) > You also get spammed on IRC > whenever someone joins or leaves a channel. Jabber prevents this by > providing a real presence system. you can ignore this in IRC too. > Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC > does in group chat, except bans actually work because they're not > stupidly > tied to some arbitrary netmask. yeah. ban is tied to user account ? who prevents an annoying user to creates a lot of annoying accounts ? > Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't > spammed to the channel unless your client adds them in for you (but > changes > are still reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). you mean, like on irc ? > Jabber networks > don't go on begging sprees for funding. OFTC will invariably spam you > like > every other IRC network since the dawn of time the first moment they > get more > than a few users. i'm sure there are jabber network which do that. but you can use a gateway which doesnt. like using an irc network which doesnt do that. Ok, so it's a flameware irc vs jabber ? On -project ? Duh. I'm not really used to thoses flames, but I thought they were taking place on -devel. The initial post was about moving *irc*.debian.org from an irc network to another. If you don't want to use irc, nobody forces you. But why posting here a mail that has nothing to do with the initial message ? -- Yves-Alexis Perez -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 03:52:33PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote: > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote: > > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these > > > days than IRC. > > > > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. > > So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. As it is, IRC *does* have non-sucking non-graphic clients. If you think people should switch to Jabber, I think you ought to write such a client, not someone who's not interested in using Jabber in the first place. > > for the usual one to one communication it might be ok, but for > > groupchat (and thats what most people do on IRC it simply sucks. > > By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like spamming > the channel to announce they're going away, That's not really the design of IRC; rather, it's the design of some clients. > or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the > channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or > leaves a channel. Most IRC clients allow those to be switched off. Personally, I happen to like them. > Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. IRC has a real presence system, too. > Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC does in group chat, except > bans actually work because they're not stupidly tied to some arbitrary > netmask. Well, there's one "advantage". > Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel > unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still > reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). Joins and parts you already mentioned. Nickname changes? I wouldn't know why the fsck you *wouldn't* want to be informed of those. > Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding. Hell yes they do. My Jabber server administrator has sent me some "please support my bandwidth" request in the past. > OFTC will invariably spam you like every other IRC network since the > dawn of time the first moment they get more than a few users. As it is, that hasn't happened yet. Can we talk about things that are actually happening, rather than things that *might* happen at some point in the undefined future, please? > IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still > plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of > improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world > moved on already? Move on to what? A protocol that broadcasts whether I'm online to everyone I've ever chatted with? Thanks, but no thanks. Jabber has its place as an IM protocol, but not as a group chat thing; IRC is way better there. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Paul Johnson writes: > By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like spamming > the channel to announce they're going away, or indicating their status with > nicknames (which also spams the channel). You also get spammed on IRC > whenever someone joins or leaves a channel. Jabber prevents this by > providing a real presence system. Wrong. It is (bad) social habits that cause people to notify channels when they go away, not the design of IRC. (In many channels, that kind of antisocial spam is grounds for a ban.) IRC's AWAY, WHO, WHOIS, and related messages provide adequate presence notification. Michael Poole -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:40, Cord Beermann wrote: > >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these > > days than IRC. > > Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. So write one or grab one of the existing ones and make it not suck. > for the usual one > to one communication it might be ok, but for groupchat (and thats what > most people do on IRC it simply sucks. By design, IRC encourages people to do truly obnoxious things, like spamming the channel to announce they're going away, or indicating their status with nicknames (which also spams the channel). You also get spammed on IRC whenever someone joins or leaves a channel. Jabber prevents this by providing a real presence system. Jabber provides all the same "modes" IRC does in group chat, except bans actually work because they're not stupidly tied to some arbitrary netmask. Nicknames changes, joins and parts aren't spammed to the channel unless your client adds them in for you (but changes are still reflected in the listing of who is in the chat). Jabber networks don't go on begging sprees for funding. OFTC will invariably spam you like every other IRC network since the dawn of time the first moment they get more than a few users. IRC was a good early effort, but 20 years have passed and IRC is still plagued by the same problems it started with and shows no signs of improvement over time, just like Windows. Isn't it time the world moved on already? -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpoXGApJeQ27.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
* Joerg Jaspert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060501 23:12]: > On 10641 March 1977, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > > > - network stability: oftc annoys with many netsplits lately. This might > > be temporary, but in the last month it was extreme. > > No, some were there, but not more than in Feenode. Well, perhaps I'm around at the wrong times. But in the last weeks I had one netsplit per day on avarage on oftc, but I cannot remember when the last one was on freenode. (At least when there where some some time ago there was some message they were changing something and that it will stop soon and it stoped soon, with oftc it just happen several times every next day.) > > - nickserv/chanserv services differ. I'm receiving the expression > > freenodes are more sophisticated, but that might just be usage. > > What are you missing, there is Chanserv/nickserv too? Taking a closer look I guess most feature are available on oftc, too, but only a bit worse documented. First example: the chanserv command drop gets a help text from oftc's chanserv when explicitly requested, but it is neither in the verbose list of commands of help, not in the short "other commands" list it shows. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:24:52PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is > To users who have not been long enough on the network to register? The problem is that the high amount of disconnection one gets from freenode makes this a pain, especially as it is not clear for clients like irssi when you are allowed to post or not, as the error message does not appear in the /query channel, but in the log one, and it doesn't even specify who you tried to /query and was blocked. You mentioned some auto-identify scripts, care to give an example of how that would work and respond to both above problems ? Also, i guess that if you allow none-reg /querying, this leaves you open to wide amount of irc-spam that has been circulating in freenode, and supposedly oftc is (still) less vulnerable to this. I personally am on both networks, and probably won't notice much, but the private /query problem sure has been a pain. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On 4/30/06, Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Thoughts? I'm in favour as well. -- Besos, Marga
Re: irc.debian.org
On 2 May 2006, Manoj Srivastava spake thusly: > I was pretty neutral about whether we should pull > irc.debian.org away from freenode, but a recent incident makes me > wonder how developer friendly freenode is anymore. Apparently, the incident of k-lining me was an errant and buggy script, and not policy (and I would have realized that had I not been up for 36 hour straight when I wrote that email). Given that, I am back to being nuetral. I have a number of channels that would remain on freenode for (SELinux, rockbox, amarok, nlug), and others only live on oftc (debian-kernel, spi, debian-women), so I'll probably auto-connect to both (and since I use a modern front end like emacs, conneting to multiple servers and bitlbee is not a concern personally :) manoj -- You will be the victim of a bizarre joke. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 06:34:24PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >> >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is > >> To users who have not been long enough on the network to register? > >no, not to those and not to those others that feel that they are made to > >jump through hoops and neither to those who left already. only to the > >rest. > So you are saying that it does not actually inconvenience you, but you > are opposing this feature on principle? I'm thinking that what he's *really* saying is "there're so many people whom I can't talk to this way that it's almost impossible". -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is >> To users who have not been long enough on the network to register? >no, not to those and not to those others that feel that they are made to >jump through hoops and neither to those who left already. only to the >rest. So you are saying that it does not actually inconvenience you, but you are opposing this feature on principle? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Peter Samuelson wrote: > And as for Debian development, I receive even fewer private messages > related to that. Do the rest of you? What aspects of Debian > development warrant private conversations? I would think most things > would be appropriate to discuss either in public or in small, focused > channels. I field large amounts of debian development stuff in /msg. Most of it is stupid debhelper and debconf questions. :-) A significant amount of the rest is other technical stuff too involved or special-purpose to be very interesting to others. For example, approximatly once per week I /msg elmo "plz update the tasksel overrides file from svn". It's important that elmo get that message, it's useless for other people to see it, and we have zero irc chanels in common. Some smaller fraction might be more debian-private related, or just general social interaction. Just as I don't walk around with a webcam and a mic every time I meet someone in a pub and talk about Debian stuff there, I don't think this is a big deal or an openness issue (nor are the private emails, which are about the same). This (the private messaging, not the pubcrawling) might have gone up a bit since I stopped participating in either #debian-devel. FWIW, one reason I stopped is because of the useless and highly annoying split of that channel, and I can't see ever returning to that channel until the two have somehow merged back together. -- see shy jo signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
Hallo! Du (Paul Johnson) hast geschrieben: >On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:34, Steve McIntyre wrote: >> I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the >> official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see >> that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to >> the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at >> all. I strongly second to move to OFTC. why? lilo spammed me some years ago to get some funding for freenode (which ment in that case that he wanted to be paid for running freenode), so i decided to not use it. Nothing against funding, and adding notes to websites and motds, but getting a daily wallop was annoying. >Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is these days >than IRC. Jabber doesn't have any useable non-graphic Clients. for the usual one to one communication it might be ok, but for groupchat (and thats what most people do on IRC it simply sucks. Cord -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 02:24:52PM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is > To users who have not been long enough on the network to register? no, not to those and not to those others that feel that they are made to jump through hoops and neither to those who left already. only to the rest. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tuesday 02 May 2006 12:36, Jon Dowland wrote: > At 1146403978 past the epoch, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > > these days than IRC. > > Really? I'd love to see some figures. can't find much hard numbers, let along comparisons between IRC-use and Jabber use, but here is the general info regarding jabber use I found: - jabber.com appearently had 4 milion licensed users back in 2003 [1] with an additional 6 milion estimated open source users at that time thus surpassing the number of ICQ users [2] - since then we've had xmpp (the jabber protocol) published as RFC, - Jabber Journal 23 [3] mentions that there are over 10.000 activer jabber servers on the public network (so not counting those behind company firewalls), the same page also names a number of big deployments (such as France Telecom, Bellsouth, Orange, AT&T, EDS, FedEx, HP, Oracle, and Sun) - Apple added xmpp support to iChat [3] [9]. - googletalk uses xmpp [4] and is now federated [10] - according to the latest jabber journal IBM is adding xmpp support to Lotus Sametime [4] - sun's IM server uses xmpp [5] - [6] lists 13 different jabber server implementations (of which 7 are proprietary ones from different companies), [7] lists a gazillion clients, [8] lists a gazillion software libraries for using xmpp [1] http://www.jabber.com/index.cgi?CONTENT_ID=357 [2] http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/0,39020384,39117160,00.htm [3] http://www.jabber.org/journal/2005-06-24.shtml [4] http://www.jabber.org/journal/2006-03-24.shtml [5] http://www.sun.com/software/products/instant_messaging/ [6] http://www.jabber.org/software/servers.shtml [7] http://www.jabber.org/software/clients.shtml [8] http://www.jabber.org/software/libraries.shtml [9] http://www.apple.com/macosx/features/ichat/ [10] http://googletalk.blogspot.com/2006/01/xmpp-federation.html -- Cheers, cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis) 1. Encrypted mail preferred (GPG KeyID: 0x86624ABB) 2. Plain-text mail recommended since I move html and double format mails to a low priority folder (they're mainly spam) pgp9CJZCtyUUI.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is To users who have not been long enough on the network to register? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >One might think private messages are useful in user support, but >#debian actually has a channel policy asking users not to send them >without permission. As a result, I don't get many private messages >from #debian users. ACK. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
At 1146403978 past the epoch, Paul Johnson wrote: > Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > these days than IRC. Really? I'd love to see some figures. -- Jon Dowland http://alcopop.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 12:16:14PM +0200, Andreas Schuldei wrote: >On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 04:47:22AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: >> [Wouter Verhelst] >> > Only if they're lucky enough to try to ask someone who has >> > NOIDPRIVMSG disabled. >> >> And as for Debian development, I receive even fewer private messages >> related to that. Do the rest of you? What aspects of Debian >> development warrant private conversations? I would think most things >> would be appropriate to discuss either in public or in small, focused >> channels. > >I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is >a reason to favour a move to oftc. Ditto. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK.[EMAIL PROTECTED] "The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore. We don't just borrow words; on occasion, English has pursued other languages down alleyways to beat them unconscious and rifle their pockets for new vocabulary." -- James D. Nicoll signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Tue, May 02, 2006 at 04:47:22AM -0500, Peter Samuelson wrote: > [Wouter Verhelst] > > Only if they're lucky enough to try to ask someone who has > > NOIDPRIVMSG disabled. > > And as for Debian development, I receive even fewer private messages > related to that. Do the rest of you? What aspects of Debian > development warrant private conversations? I would think most things > would be appropriate to discuss either in public or in small, focused > channels. I get and send a lot of /msg in my debian releated work. for me this is a reason to favour a move to oftc. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
> On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 01:24:15AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > If you want to receive their privated messages then *you* can > > disable NOIDPRIVMSG and they will not even know about it. [Wouter Verhelst] > Only if they're lucky enough to try to ask someone who has > NOIDPRIVMSG disabled. What I can't figure out is why this is such a big deal. I mean, we're not talking about a social IRC network, we're talking about the network to use for discussions related to Debian. One might think private messages are useful in user support, but #debian actually has a channel policy asking users not to send them without permission. As a result, I don't get many private messages from #debian users. And as for Debian development, I receive even fewer private messages related to that. Do the rest of you? What aspects of Debian development warrant private conversations? I would think most things would be appropriate to discuss either in public or in small, focused channels. I dunno, it just surprises me that people other than really heavy IRC users would even notice the effect of this freenode default. Not that it's exactly a _secret_ - I mean, the information is one click away from http://freenode.net/ (the link mysteriously titled "using the network"). signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >After some discussion earlier in the day about music players, > ipods, and free software one can flash on ipods, I decided to clean > up my variant of the Green5 rockbox theme and presented screenshots > on [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >The images are still at > http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/dump_060502-005528.bmp > http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/dump_060502-005659.bmp > fairly innocuous, as you can see. > >I was immediately klined from freenode, no if, and, or buts -- > apparently on the grounds that Spam is not tolerated. Why screenshots > of free software players are Spam on a debian development channel is > beyond me -- but obviously this is not a good thing to happen on a > project channel. Freenode does not have such a policy, I think that this is the result of a buggy script used by a staff member. While waiting for an explanation from him, I removed the K line. I apologize for the troubles. -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
ti, 2006-05-02 kello 10:48 +0200, Marco d'Itri kirjoitti: > Hardly documented? It's clearly explained in the FAQ page on the web > site, and a link to this is in the message received by blocked users. > It does not appear to be hidden to me. Do you have any suggestions to > improve this? How does this help the recipient of a message to learn about the situation? It is the recipient that needs to change the setting, after all. -- On IRC, we sometimes like to watch silence. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> I agree with Steve. While I agree that freenode has many flaws (the >> >>> biggest being NOIDPRIVMSG), I find that while I am in Debian channels on >> >> Exactly, why is an optional feature such a big flaw? >> >Because it's the default and practically no one changes it. This is a >> Maybe because actually it's not such a big deal? :-) >More likely, because it's hardly documented that this is the default and >because not many people know how to switch it off. Hardly documented? It's clearly explained in the FAQ page on the web site, and a link to this is in the message received by blocked users. It does not appear to be hidden to me. Do you have any suggestions to improve this? -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Benjamin Seidenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > You may also want to ask some of the DD's who refuse to use freenode > anymore. [...] I mostly avoid freenode for years now, because: - it's verbosity city, from the motd to the wallops - its bizarre behaviours like NOIDPRIVMSG and +q are confusing - it ain't nicknamed freesplit for nothing - some of its bugs have been embarrasing (high traffic mode, anyone?) - as a result of crude fixes, it's a pain to identify a local server (/links and /map disabled, web site seems to lag, page undated) - the foundation behind it seems opaque and questioning that got several people called trolls and banned - their long-term aim doesn't require running a compatible IRC environment (see http://freenode.net/freenode_and_irc.shtml ) - their long-term aim used to be to progress beyond mere IRC, develop a corridor-based discussion model with a distributed MUD interface and be picked up by a UFO following a comet, or something http://web.archive.org/web/20010305222529/http://openprojects.net/corridors.shtml It would be good to move irc.debian.org to fellow SPI project OFTC. What's the status? -- MJR/slef Laux nur mia opinio: vidu http://people.debian.org/~mjr/ Bv sekvu http://www.uk.debian.org/MailingLists/#codeofconduct -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Hi, I was pretty neutral about whether we should pull irc.debian.org away from freenode, but a recent incident makes me wonder how developer friendly freenode is anymore. After some discussion earlier in the day about music players, ipods, and free software one can flash on ipods, I decided to clean up my variant of the Green5 rockbox theme and presented screenshots on [EMAIL PROTECTED] The images are still at http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/dump_060502-005528.bmp http://people.debian.org/~srivasta/dump_060502-005659.bmp fairly innocuous, as you can see. I was immediately klined from freenode, no if, and, or buts -- apparently on the grounds that Spam is not tolerated. Why screenshots of free software players are Spam on a debian development channel is beyond me -- but obviously this is not a good thing to happen on a project channel. OFTC seem to not have such a draconian policy, I suggest we move all Debian channels off freenode. I am CC'ing the freenode staff on this message, so they do not get blind sided. manoj -- Laughter is the closest distance between two people. Victor Borge Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On 10641 March 1977, Bernhard R. Link wrote: > - network stability: oftc annoys with many netsplits lately. This might > be temporary, but in the last month it was extreme. No, some were there, but not more than in Feenode. > - nickserv/chanserv services differ. I'm receiving the expression > freenodes are more sophisticated, but that might just be usage. What are you missing, there is Chanserv/nickserv too? -- bye Joerg Joey, provide a patch then. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Em Dom, 2006-04-30 às 19:34 +0100, Steve McIntyre escreveu: > I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the > official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see > that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to > the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at > all. > > On another front, oftc is also a sister org under the SPI > umbrella. > > Thoughts? Please, do it! -- Guilherme de S. Pastore (fatalerror) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
* Steve McIntyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [060430 20:35]: > I've heard it suggested by a variety of people that we should move the > official irc.debian.org alias away from freenode to oftc. I can see > that more and more of my own Debian IRC discussions are on oftc, to > the extent that I'm (currently) not on any freenode channels at > all. While I don't really have a strong opinion, as my config just points to irc.debian.org for the debian channels, I think there are some points against a move: - network stability: oftc annoys with many netsplits lately. This might be temporary, but in the last month it was extreme. - nickserv/chanserv services differ. I'm receiving the expression freenodes are more sophisticated, but that might just be usage. Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, Joe Smith wrote: > If the move is done, the FN channels should be kept open and the > topic should redirect users to OFTC. Then any packages that > reference the FN channel should be updated. My point was that the people who really need help just follow irc.debian.org; the people who are giving the help generally don't connect directly to irc.debian.org [as they know which network they're on.] > Otherwise there would be split between the networks. There will always be a split between the networks; there are #debian channels on most of the major networks. Switching networks really won't cause the splits to go away; it'll just change which network the majority of the conversations happen on in the few cases where that hasn't changed already. Don Armstrong -- The sheer ponderousness of the panel's opinion ... refutes its thesis far more convincingly than anything I might say. The panel's labored effort to smother the Second Amendment by sheer body weight has all the grace of a sumo wrestler trying to kill a rattlesnake by sitting on it--and is just as likely to succeed. -- Alex Kozinski in Silveira V Lockyer http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 07:25:50PM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) wrote: > On 04/30/2006 05:46 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > > On Sunday 30 April 2006 22:32, Paul Johnson wrote: > > > >>Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > >>these days than IRC. > > > > Just to prove you wrong: what the hell is Jabber? > > It is an Instant Messaging Client. No it's not. It's an IM protocol, implemented by many clients in Debian, and by many servers on the 'Net. > (like ICQ, MSN, GoogleTalk, GoogleTalk, actually, uses the Jabber protocol. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 01:24:15AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >>> I agree with Steve. While I agree that freenode has many flaws (the > >>> biggest being NOIDPRIVMSG), I find that while I am in Debian channels on > >> Exactly, why is an optional feature such a big flaw? > >Because it's the default and practically no one changes it. This is a > Maybe because actually it's not such a big deal? :-) More likely, because it's hardly documented that this is the default and because not many people know how to switch it off. I know *I* had to bitch about it before being told where the documentation was. And I forgot all about it in the mean time. > >big problem, because on a network that offers so many support channels, > >you have a lot of users who are on only to get a question answered (Foo > >isn't working, what am I doing wrong?). These users have no desire, nor > >real reason to register a nick. Also, there are lots of times I have > They do not need to. If you want to receive their privated messages then > *you* can disable NOIDPRIVMSG and they will not even know about it. Only if they're lucky enough to try to ask someone who has NOIDPRIVMSG disabled. -- Fun will now commence -- Seven Of Nine, "Ashes to Ashes", stardate 53679.4 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
Marco d'Itri wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I agree with Steve. While I agree that freenode has many flaws (the biggest being NOIDPRIVMSG), I find that while I am in Debian channels on >>> Exactly, why is an optional feature such a big flaw? >>> >> Because it's the default and practically no one changes it. This is a >> > Maybe because actually it's not such a big deal? :-) > > >> big problem, because on a network that offers so many support channels, >> you have a lot of users who are on only to get a question answered (Foo >> isn't working, what am I doing wrong?). These users have no desire, nor >> real reason to register a nick. Also, there are lots of times I have >> > They do not need to. If you want to receive their privated messages then > *you* can disable NOIDPRIVMSG and they will not even know about it. > > Yet it's the default, and many don't even realize they can change this setting. Also, freenode strongly recommends that channels only allow comments from registered users. >> been disconnected, and not noticed I wasn't ID'd. I have sent people >> messages, and only hours later realized that they weren't received >> because I wasn't re-ID'd. >> > Can I suggest you use one of the autoidentification scripts? > > Yes, I keep meaning to, but that's the point: it forces more work onto the user. >> You may also want to ask some of the DD's who refuse to use freenode >> anymore. Some of them have very detailed gripes that might be able to be >> addressed. >> > Yes, some of them are also former staff members or server sponsors... > > I'm talking about well after the OFTC formation. If there are that many people dissatisfied with freenode, it seems likely that there are underlying problems that cause this. One thing I've noticed is certain unprofessional behavior among some of the staff. For instance, the april fools joke played on OFTC was very unprofessional IMHO. Please realize, I'm not anti-freenode, I just think that there are improvements that can be made. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sunday 30 April 2006 15:51, Michael Banck wrote: > On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 07:25:50PM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) wrote: > > On 04/30/2006 05:46 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > > > Just to prove you wrong: what the hell is Jabber? > > > > It is an Instant Messaging Client. > > It is not IRC though, so this point is moot. This thread is about IRC, > let's not get into discussions about instant messaging systems in > general. On the other hand, more users in general, and certainly new users to Debian, are more likely to know about Jabber than IRC thanks to Google Talk. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpbXYJIEIeUe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sunday 30 April 2006 13:46, Frans Pop wrote: > On Sunday 30 April 2006 22:32, Paul Johnson wrote: > > Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > > these days than IRC. > > Just to prove you wrong: what the hell is Jabber? Jabber is an open IM system that IETF is standardizing instant messaging on. jabber.org, jabber.ru, talk.google.com and ursine.ca are well-known Jabber servers. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jabber for more information. -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpVWfkxv26R9.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sunday 30 April 2006 14:05, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Paul Johnson: > > Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is > > these days than IRC. > > Really? jabber.debian.net does not seem to accept new users. I don't know about jabber.debian.net's registration process, however, there is a multiuser chat on Jabber at [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Paul Johnson Email and IM (XMPP & Google Talk): [EMAIL PROTECTED] Jabber: Because it's time to move forward http://ursine.ca/Ursine:Jabber pgpIx6CJOTlnP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: irc.debian.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> I agree with Steve. While I agree that freenode has many flaws (the >>> biggest being NOIDPRIVMSG), I find that while I am in Debian channels on >> Exactly, why is an optional feature such a big flaw? >Because it's the default and practically no one changes it. This is a Maybe because actually it's not such a big deal? :-) >big problem, because on a network that offers so many support channels, >you have a lot of users who are on only to get a question answered (Foo >isn't working, what am I doing wrong?). These users have no desire, nor >real reason to register a nick. Also, there are lots of times I have They do not need to. If you want to receive their privated messages then *you* can disable NOIDPRIVMSG and they will not even know about it. >been disconnected, and not noticed I wasn't ID'd. I have sent people >messages, and only hours later realized that they weren't received >because I wasn't re-ID'd. Can I suggest you use one of the autoidentification scripts? >You may also want to ask some of the DD's who refuse to use freenode >anymore. Some of them have very detailed gripes that might be able to be >addressed. Yes, some of them are also former staff members or server sponsors... -- ciao, Marco -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 07:25:50PM -0300, Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) wrote: > On 04/30/2006 05:46 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > > Just to prove you wrong: what the hell is Jabber? > > It is an Instant Messaging Client. It is not IRC though, so this point is moot. This thread is about IRC, let's not get into discussions about instant messaging systems in general. Michael -- anyone else such an irssi fan? [Act: 17,19,24,37,38,97,102, 114,122,134,140,141,142,143,187,201,211,216,264,294,306,334,350, 352,353,398,458,467,520,599,678,698,718,744,751,752,753,754] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: irc.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 04/30/2006 05:46 PM, Frans Pop wrote: > On Sunday 30 April 2006 22:32, Paul Johnson wrote: > >>Why not move it to Jabber? More people use and know what Jabber is >>these days than IRC. > > Just to prove you wrong: what the hell is Jabber? It is an Instant Messaging Client. (like ICQ, MSN, GoogleTalk, AIM). You can find [1]lots of information about jabber in their [2]website. I just copied a little introduction part: Jabber is best known as "the Linux of instant messaging" -- an open, secure, ad-free alternative to consumer IM services like AIM, ICQ, MSN, and Yahoo (see the IM quickstart). Under the hood, Jabber is a set of streaming XML protocols and technologies that enable any two entities on the Internet to exchange messages, presence, and other structured information in close to real time. Jabber technologies offer several key advantages: * Open -- the Jabber protocols are free, open, public, and easily understandable; in addition, multiple implementations exist for clients, servers, components, and code libraries. * Standard -- the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has formalized the core XML streaming protocols as an approved instant messaging and presence technology under the name of XMPP, and the XMPP specifications have been published as RFC 3920 and RFC 3921 1.http://www.jabber.org/about/overview.shtml 2.http://www.jabber.org/ Kind regards, - -- Felipe Augusto van de Wiel (faw) "Debian. Freedom to code. Code to freedom!" -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEVTltCjAO0JDlykYRAl3DAKCTiCIyx2/n5ZCLCvR4/1pwlTumOgCglPwY soh+LC4tlRouqRuxFucsI78= =f0Nw -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
