From: Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net>
To: "J.P." <jp@neverwas.me>
Cc: 51342@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#51342: 29.0.50; remove non-CAPs from rcirc capability list
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2021 20:22:14 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87wnl6leh5.fsf@posteo.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <877ddaxrod.fsf@neverwas.me> (J. P.'s message of "Sun, 14 Nov 2021 15:07:14 -0800")
"J.P." <jp@neverwas.me> writes:
> Philip Kaludercic <philipk@posteo.net> writes:
>
>>> Standard replies are quite mysterious. From what I can gather:
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> I understand the issue, but am still hesitant. If this is vague, then
>> it seems better to err on the side of safety
>
> What's mysterious and vague isn't the existence of a capability called
> standard-replies. No such capability currently exists. As mentioned in
> my last reply (not sure if you saw that one), the closest thing is
> inspircd.org/standard-replies. Hope that makes sense.
>
>> Or are there any real downsides to being more explicit?
>
> No downsides at present because you request one cap per line. And you
> have no interdependent caps as yet. So long as both remain true, there's
> nothing to worry about. And rcirc doesn't make you accrue flood debt,
> so early messages (even spurious ones) don't cost extra.
Ok, then I think we should leave it the way it is for now.
> In ERC's case, we *do* have to worry because we implement 302 and have
> multiple dependencies. If any one gets NAK'd, there goes the ball game.
> There's also some undefined behavior [1] that can turn connection
> registration into a bit of a limbo without additional planning (should
> you ever decide to go that route). Thanks.
I think you should report this as a separate bug report.
> [1] https://github.com/ircv3/ircv3-specifications/pull/400#issuecomment-579063998
>
--
Philip Kaludercic
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-11-17 20:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-10-23 0:08 bug#51342: 29.0.50; remove non-CAPs from rcirc capability list J.P.
2021-10-23 1:59 ` J.P.
2021-10-24 10:05 ` Philip Kaludercic
2021-10-24 14:03 ` J.P.
2021-10-26 3:50 ` J.P.
2021-11-14 18:10 ` Philip Kaludercic
2021-11-14 23:07 ` J.P.
2021-11-17 20:22 ` Philip Kaludercic [this message]
2022-09-13 14:49 ` Lars Ingebrigtsen
2022-09-13 18:30 ` J.P.
[not found] ` <877d15yxun.fsf@neverwas.me>
2022-10-12 13:36 ` J.P.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87wnl6leh5.fsf@posteo.net \
--to=philipk@posteo.net \
--cc=51342@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=jp@neverwas.me \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).