[IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick links?

[Andrew Church]

     As the subject says, I'd like to know if anyone finds the nested
link system in Services useful, or if it's unnecessary.  I originally
modeled the system after symbolic links on Unix (and other) filesystems,
but as this makes for added complexity and has in fact led to a number
of bugs in the past as well as administrative difficulties.  So if
there's no need for having multiple levels of nicks, I'm planning to
just remove that capability in version 5 and limit links to a single
level.

     Note that the only case in which this makes a visible difference is
the following:
    * Register NickA
    * Register NickB
    * Link NickB to NickA
    * Register NickC
    * Link NickC to NickB
    * Unlink NickB from NickA
    * Change a setting on NickB
In the nested (current) system, NickC would use the new setting for
NickB set in the last step, while in a flat system, NickC would retain
the original settings associated with nick A.  I can see potential cases
where this functionality can be useful, but if no one is actually using
links that way, then there's no real need to retain the functionality.

     So, opinions, please: do you need nested links?

  --Andrew Church
    achurch at achurch.org
    http://achurch.org/