|
|
 | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) I think if we have a proxy that understands FTX and can translate it, the output format shouldn't be set - have that part be pluggable, so you could have it output html, or plain text, or anything else we can think of. Just have the proxy (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) The term "RSS-to-NNTP" does not really make sense. RSS is a data format, whereas NNTP is a protocol. You can convert RSS-feeds (independently of their transport protocols) to plain text and post them to an appropriate newsgroup. But you can't (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) I don't follow Lugnet through a newsreader (not since the port change). The combination of the annoying e-mail-based authentication, figuring out how to reconfigure my newsreader for the non-standard port, and my general annoyance with having (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) But which format would you translate it to? Wouldn't you have to translate the FTX articles to HTML to get the inlined images? And wouldn't that limit the practical number of NNTP clients slightly? - But of course not as much as implementing (...) (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) I disagree strongly! What protocol exists, which can replace NNTP and which has all the same benefits as NNTP. (...) NNTP is _not_ cumbersome. (but the Lugnet NNTP server is practically unusable to me) I agree that Lugnet doesn't use NNTP very (...) (19 years ago, 28-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
|
