[IRCServices Coding] Feature Request (AUTOVHOST)

[Colin Thorpe(SCF)]

I think it would have been a good idea.. Although looking at the new version
of unreal - (and even the current ones)
this (in a way) Already exists - Unreal 3.2 - Has an auto v-host that can be
set on oper -and it also supports set host - which you can put in your mirc
PERFORM (or other clients equivelant) and leave it - it operates silently
and effortlessly - It would be noce, but i feel that at this stage,
pointless, maybe it could be made as an add-on module for thoes who want
it - but not somthing that's BUILT-IN Already

As-far as i am aware bahumut and unreal are the only ones i know of that
support changing of v-hosts - dynamically (by issueing a commant) others use
somthing like an S: or V: line

Colin

>Subject: RE: [IRCServices Coding] Feature Request (AUTOVHOST)
>From: Shaun Guth <l8nite at l8nite.net>
>To: ircservices-coding at ircservices.za.net
>Date: 20 Jul 2002 02:41:04 -0700
>Reply-To: ircservices-coding at ircservices.za.net
>
>On Sat, 2002-07-20 at 02:09, Elijah wrote:
>> Seems like pointless bloat with little use to most ircds supported by
>> ircservices.
>>
>> ELIJAH
>.
>I agree that it has little use to most ircds supported by ircservices (I
>mentioned that I wasn't sure how many supported the CHGHOST command).  I
>thought that since the configuration of ircservices is so well organized
>regarding what ircd module you have loaded, it wouldn't be a problem.
>
>But I don't agree with you calling it bloat...  Maybe you meant feature
>bloat, but then so is an httpd for services, email confirmation of
>nicknames, or nick linking/grouping.  So the argument goes both ways...
>Or perhaps you meant code bloat?  My changes for Epona took maybe 10
>lines at the most, plus the additional help text needed for each
>language file.  Or do you just mean it would bloat the running program,
>using up too much memory and processing power?  Well, I doubt that it
>would use up more than the SET URL feature of nickserv, which probably
>is more useless (and less used), than this feature would be.  And I
>highly doubt it would slow the running program down by more than a
>microsecond or two.
>
>Anyway, if it's not wanted for the main distribution I'll just find time
>later this month or next month to add it for my own personal use...
>never hurts to ask :-)
>
>Thanks for responding,
>Shaun Guth