[IRCServices] I: service for ircu

[Scott Seufert]

on 6/28/00 8:02 PM, Kelmar K. Firesun at kfiresun at ix.netcom.com wrote:

> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andrew Kempe" <andrewk at icon.co.za>
> To: <ircservices at delirious.shadowfire.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2000 12:49 AM
> Subject: Re: [IRCServices] I: service for ircu
> 
> 
>> All future development will be for DALnet's Bahamut ircd. This ircd
> combines
>> the benefits of Hybrid (speed and TS3) and Dreamforge (Services support -
>> among other things).
>> 
> 
> ] ... SNIP ... [
> 
> Are you completely dropping support for all other IRCD's!?
> 
> If so, this sounds rather presumptuous.  Several people still use the older
> daemons for many reasons, not to say the least are for efficiency and
> "ethic"
> reasons.  (Some people view forcively changing a user's mode and/or nick to
> be wrong)
> 
> For my own reasons, this is going to make things harder on my part with the
> designs of the IRCD that I've been working on for sometime.  I'll not have
> a familiar starting ground on which to make my daemon compatible with
> services.
> That being the original server to server negotiations as outlined in RFC
> 1459.
> Bahamut and DreamForge use a modified version there of.
> 
> Further more, you'll be shutting everyone out, not everyone is going to want
> to
> change their server (let alone their whole network) over to Bahamut.  Last I
> had
> a Bahamut/DF mix on my network it caused some major stability problems.
> 
> I urge you to please reconsider your decision in this matter.
> 
> Thank you,
> Bryce Simonds
> Kelmar K. Firesun
> 
> 

I'm FAR from the decision maker as to what ircservices is and isn't
capatible with. but I'd like to share a few pennies with you.

First, is that ircservices are free of charge, meaning the coder(s) isn't
getting paid a dime to code, and such code comes from kindness of heart, not
from requests from end users. Please don't confuse my last sentence to mean
that coders don't value end user input, they do, that's where alot of ideas
and bug fixes are spawned.

It's MY opinion that the coder(s) should be allowed to go any direction they
wish and the end user should expect at least what the pay for.

I am friends with several coders of services. Opus for OtherNet Services,
Andrew Kempe, current maintainer of ircservices and I would like to count
Andy Church in that group if I only got to know him more, seems that I don't
see him interact publicly as often. It seems that the majority opinion from
GPL coders in general is that their number one issue is that the end user
isn't satisfied with what is given to them for free, they always want more
and sometimes go as far as demanding more. I'm not saying nor implying that
you or anyone associated with yourself or your network is doing such, I'm
saying basiclly you can't please everyone. CServe for OtherNet was pulled
off of the GPL license with the release of CS6/UW9, Opus tried to sell the
code he worked very hard on and nearly "gave" the project away, just to rid
of it. CServe/UWorld is unfortunately no longer available to the public. GPL
or for sale. Opus was pounded because the code wasn't public, so he made it
public with the GPL license, then he was pounded because it didn't meet end
users demands, so he tried to sell it, and was pounded 10 fold for trying to
sell it.

I can't do anything shy of admire those that write/maintain GPL Services.
They give and give without asking anything in return other than obey the
license and to RTFM before asking for support, so why not let them deside
what is supported and what isn't? So what if it's harder on a few end users.
To be blunt, most end users would be without services all together if it
wasn't for the efforts of these coders. So lets concider how hard it is on
the coders to do multidaemon support.

You also have the option to continue a mutliple ircd services yourself or
work closely with someone that maybe interested/knowledgable in
coding,ircservices is still GPL. So as long as GPL licensing is followed you
may spawn your own services off and continue that way. Please bear in mind
if it wasn't for kind hearted GPL coders, you would most likely have to buy
or code services yourself. If you follow this course of action I wish you
the best of luck. I hope you are prepared to deal with not only the
headaches of coding, but countless hours of end user support, bug fixes,
mailing lists, hundreds of emails both commending you and condemning you,
visitors trafficing your channel on your net looking for support and/or you
to install services for them because they didn't RTFM. I wish you luck, not
only for the fact that I have no ill feelings toward one that tries to make
a difference, but I wish you luck because you WILL need it ...

Secondly, if you pin point a specific IRCD type you can have it work even
closer be it is only coded for said daemon, it would only have to support
the commands from one type instead of many. This makes services smaller,
faster and seemingly more seemless than multiple ircd support (which was
Andy Church's original plan). That plan being to have good quality non
bloated ircservices. I personally like one IRCD support, 99% performance of
one daemon to me is far more valuable than 80% performance on multiple
daemon support.

What did I gain?
I didn't have to write services myself

What did I loose?
I had to use/switch the recommended daemon (which I didn't have to write it
either)

Over all, I lost nothing.


My $0.02,

Scott
aka Aanrki
aka katsklaw
Server Admin
NoDoze,ShadowFire.Org


---------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to majordomo at ender.shadowfire.org
with "unsubscribe ircservices" in the body, without the quotes.