[IRCServices] Chanserv Kick command?

[Countersync]

I actually think that there should be some sort of exposure of API calls for
bots as well.  So many times I've wanted an easy way to do mass status
commands, retrieve an array of addresses only given a list of nicknames,
perhaps even an option to use system compression/encryption codecs before
sending messages between the server and client.  Also; having an option to
open DCC sessions to services (or telnet in to them if logged in to IRC) to
bypass the regular network would also be an interesting idea.

Anyway back to this thread's idea.  It would be REALLY interesting if the
services had not only the ability to do anything a channel op can do, but
also the option to give users the ability to only do certain things, a
method of going beyond simple at level X you can do this.  Perhaps a group
method, perhaps something similar to Unix file permissions (which on most
systems have different ways of accessing the actual storage of data.  Such
as a more verbose structure for normal users, which separates different
options in to actual word phrases or simple yes/no choices.  Verses the hex
or octal modes that allow for much shorter setting by just doing the raw
bitlevel.)

Places that this would be extremely useful are if you have a user that you
trust with invites, but don't want to allow them access to being an actual
op.  Or if you have a bot that is just supposed to do voice issues but not
any kicks/bans/etc.  There are variations upon these themes, however these
are the most common ones that I've seen.

The ideal layout for services would be having EVERYTHING in modules.  There
would be defined interfaces for each module.  Each module would become it's
own thread(s), and even code tree.  For example if there was a kick module,
when a user asks it to do something, there would be a standard "Can this
user do X" call within the access module.  This module could then use
whatever method the compiler/administrators saw fit to include.  It would no
longer matter where or how the databases were stored, or how each component
worked.  They would evolve separately like TCP/IP.

Additionally there would be different interaction versions.  Optionally
legacy support in future versions for named older modules, perhaps even
wrapper modules to ease transitions.  Right now this is about as detailed as
I can get.  I believe that I understand the general concepts of programming,
however I do not know the actual ramifications of what I ask.  I have no
clue how easy/difficult these would be do to.  From what I do know this
seems to be the most logical and productive path.  Speaking of that,
labeling from individual sub-routines up would help some other ideas that I
have for the future.  Especially if each were maintained by a single person
and had a defined structure for passing variables if it were to be exposed;
actually I guess that would have to be anyway.

Sorry for being this long and just dropping this.  I just started typing and
somewhere along the line I realized that now was probably the right time to
insert my 'grandiose' ideas.  Especially since having a more realistic look
on the future I won't be good enough to even think of taking on a project
this big for about 1 year if I work hard; which I'm going to have to do for
the college I'm planning to attend.  So that optimistic figure is not likely
to be realistic.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Daniel" <dan_jr at ultim.net>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 01:30
> Of course ..
>
> But is very useful sometime to use chanserv to kick someone
>
> like to voice someone with it!
>
> I know it is easy to add as function in.  and im suggesting it
> for the next release..
> I mean..  I use operserv to kick someone in channel sometime
> but regular chaops can't and any regular bots or other services
> can use kick command into chanserv..
> -----Original Message-----
> [mailto:ircservices-admin at ircservices.za.net]On Behalf Of Andrew Church
> Sent: 19 mai, 2001 20:04
> >I would like to know
> >
> >if there is any possibility to add a KICK command to chanserv
> >like operserv have!
>
>      Why is a regular /kick insufficient?
>
>   --Andrew Church
>     achurch at achurch.org
>     http://achurch.org/