[icq-devel] libicq2000 0.3.0 released
rad2k at mail.ru
rad2k at mail.ru
Thu Apr 18 18:26:25 CEST 2002
> Cool, that's good work. It'd be good to get some docs back into the
> community maybe on the stricq site or something as implementations
> alone aren't the ideal way of spreading the knowledge.
Indeed. Still, even if a programmer is really willing to spread the
knowledge, its a hard and imperfect ideal to document everything
(from a programmer's point of view.)
I don't mean to harm anyone, but the 'stricq' site did need some
corrections when i very first browsed it and, at least for me,
it's down pretty often.
> I wasn't thinking of anything as specific as tying them together
> particularly.. you know just sharing information - there's a vast
> amount of work being done on the protocol for the various clients out
> there and what I consider to be a huge amount of duplication and
> wasted effort, and stuff isn't so openly shared.. which is meant to be
> what opensource is all about. Still I guess documenting is always the
> boring part :-(
Might be boring, might be hard, I find it attractive and one of the
only ways of having visual proof of your hard work. That is why I
spend time writing stuff on my docs/ directory.
> For example, I think the gnomeicu team had got a considerable way
> towards server-based lists a while ago.. but it seems you ended up
> duplicating this effort because the information wasn't openly
> documented and shared (I don't count sourcecode hidden away on a cvs
> server somewhere documenting it openly). Is there anyone from gnomeicu
> on this list?
I had no idea about gnomeicu, i never even used it since i dislike
that window manager :). You will only find a nice transparent
e-term with YSM running in my Window Maker.
> Part of the reason I see behind this is the race in the competition
> between clients.. what with the new protocol being absolutely
> necessary to survival now, developers are falling over themselves to
> be the first to get theirs fully working again. I don't think this
> competition is beneficial in the long term, hence why I've always
> coded my protocol implementation as a separate library and have pushed
> for other people to use it too.
I believe the race is true and obvious yeah, everyone wants his
work to be fully working again, and I support the will of the
programmers since i have sometimes felt the same feeling, but
I agree with you that having a generic library and making it
public is a nice and efficient idea too.
At the first time, YSM was just a stupid project of mine for coding
an icq client for my own since i thought there were no active
developments of v7 clients, but when i had it basically working
i met in my way zICQ and Ickle, my point is, i was about to quit
the YSM development until i found out none of those clients were
written in the C language.
I guess there are 4 main languages used to develop ICQ clients
right now, which are perl, c, c++ and Java and this means
some kind of 'race' is required, unless we somehow join all
projects together (Which i see is way an impossible task).
> The other idea I had was to implement it in a language to appeal to
> the lowest common denominator (C) and then code wrappers for
> higher-level languages.. much like the work of the gtkmm project
> wrapping the gnome libraries. But I've started in C++ so that's what
> I'm sticking too.
I haven't really taken a look at your library source code,
but im damn sure its somehow more tidy in classes than in
common C source code.
> Yep.. if you're doing it for any reason, doing it for your users is
> the best reason I can think of.
Btw, haven't you even started the research on online Buddy lists?
I'm out, got to get back to my job.
(damn, today the dollar got up to 3,15 pesos)
> Enough rambling..
> icq-devel - The forum for ICQ protocol discussion
> For unsubscribe and other mailing list info, see:
More information about the icq-devel