Multiple roots (was Re: [IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick links?)

[Strider]

I only use one level of linking...never really considered multiple levels,
all my extra nicks link back to one. As for multiple roots...the SU command
is extremely helpful and I feel is more secure.

Beau (Strider) Steward
chatcircuit administrator and 6bit band member
strider at chatcircuit.com        www.chatcircuit.com
ircadmin at chatcircuit.com     irc.chatcircuit.com
strider at 6bit.net                    www.6bit.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andrew Church" <achurch at achurch.org>
To: <ircservices at ircservices.za.net>
Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 9:35 PM
Subject: Multiple roots (was Re: [IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick
links?)


> >dont entirely get rid of it though, its great for sharing the root if
need
> >be.
> >question: why dont you just allow multiple roots?
>
>      I don't see why either of these are necessary.  Use SU.
>
> >-backburn aka brandon jank
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Andrew Church" <achurch at achurch.org>
> >To: <ircservices at ircservices.za.net>
> >Sent: Monday, May 14, 2001 6:04 PM
> >Subject: [IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick links?
> >
> >
> >>      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/
> >> -----------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, mail ircservices-request at ircservices.za.net
> >> with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject of the mail.
> >> http://www.ircservices.za.net/mailman/listinfo/ircservices
> >>
> >
> >-----------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, mail ircservices-request at ircservices.za.net
> >with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject of the mail.
> >http://www.ircservices.za.net/mailman/listinfo/ircservices
>
>   --Andrew Church
>     achurch at achurch.org
>     http://achurch.org/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, mail ircservices-request at ircservices.za.net
> with the word UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject of the mail.
> http://www.ircservices.za.net/mailman/listinfo/ircservices
>