[IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick links?

[Yusuf Iskenderoglu]

Hello;

I've had a suggestion:

Create a command like:

/ns link add|del|list nick

Where "nick" is NOT registered. This would solve the case of nests,
and allow the usage of many many links.

Regards;
yusuf

----------------------------------------------------------------------
| Yusuf Iskenderoglu                | You get to meet all sorts,     |
| eMail - uhc0 at rz.uni-karlsruhe.de  | in this line of work...        |
| eMail - s_iskend at ira.uka.de       |                                |
| ICQ UIN : 20587464 \ TimeMr14C    |                                |
----------------------------------------------------------------------



> -----Original Message-----
> From: ircservices-admin at ircservices.za.net
> [mailto:ircservices-admin at ircservices.za.net] On Behalf Of Daniel
> Sent: Dienstag, 15. Mai 2001 12:06
> To: ircservices at ircservices.za.net
> Subject: RE: [IRCServices] Does anyone use nested nick links?
>
>
> I use them everyday!
>
> very helpfull
>
> Dan from NeverNet Irc Network
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ircservices-admin at ircservices.za.net
> [mailto:ircservices-admin at ircservices.za.net]On Behalf Of
> Andrew Church
> Sent: 14 mai, 2001 21:05
> To: ircservices at ircservices.za.net
> 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
>