[icq-devel] libicq2000 0.3.0 released
bgrg2 at cam.ac.uk
Fri Apr 19 02:00:27 CEST 2002
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 04:26:25PM +0000, rad2k at mail.ru wrote:
> > 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.)
It is hard, but I don't see that as any reason to not positively
encourage it, the hardest ideals are the most beneficial.
> 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.
Sure.. I think it's run on someones own machine (sorry I can't
remember your name.. know you are on this list), I think some CGI
driven thing like this that can easily be updated and worked on by the
community at large would be a good way of pooling resources.. I used
to be a dab-hand at perl & SQL driven web stuff so would have a go if
I had the time..
> > 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.
Sure.. exactly my point, you didn't know someone else had already done
the work, which lead to duplication and wasted time.
> 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).
Yep, I'm not arguing against there being a race, I'm happy with
competition between clients in terms of their user interfaces. This is
what matters to the user, and why one person picks Gtk client over a
Qt client, or a console client :-) This is definitely language
specific. But when the race is in figuring out parts of the new
protocol I don't think it's justified as being productive. Sure the
implementation of the protocol is language specific, but it's the
actual decoding of it that I think should be shared and collaborated
on better this is where the duplication and wasted effort strikes me
as a crying shame.
> Btw, haven't you even started the research on online Buddy lists?
Nope.. more pressing things to do - like direct connections (which
have been implemented in libicq2000 for quite a bit), file transfers,
Hope this isn't boring people on this list too much.. thought the
discussion would do some good, lemme know your thoughts - agreement or
More information about the icq-devel