|
|
 | | admin.dev? [Was: Dear NNTP users]
|
| (...) Okay, this looks like a good spot for me to ask: "Would you guys like a newsgroup for discussion of LUGNET's development?" I've gotten a few offers now for coding help. Yeaaa!! I'll be honest: From behind the scenes, it's looking more and more (...) (19 years ago, 31-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) A quick scan through the vbulletin boards reveals 5 releases in the same time frame, all of which had security issues, one marked critical. I think that's comparable to phpBB's record, don't you? But we should not be discussing the relative (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) Looking at the phpBB website all 6 had security fixes, although not all "critical" (...) If nothing happens within those 6 months... phpBB just has a very bad track record with regard to their code quality, compared to infoPoP, vBulletin and (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) I've got the fat pipe. So I'd like to be able to tell this NNTP client to go ahead and grab images (maybe I'd set it to pre-fetch all images, maybe only for certain groups). That way I don't have to wait for slow websites or bad URLs. (...) (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) Actually, people were having online discussions about LEGO for a long time, before digital images were so prevalent. But I think it's a matter of preference -- I don't spend nearly as much of my 'LEGO' time looking at MOCs as other people do. (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) If I want to see the pictures I just kick their URL's off to my image viewer. If I don't, I don't have to wait for them to arrive. (...) So do I. But not af all the MOCs. (...) That requires a rather fat pipe-line. With a 56 kbit/s modem line (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) I am not making a mistake. I am referring to use rather than the precise definition. I am well aware that a protocol and a data format are different, does a typical user care, however, that (s)he just downloaded a file via FTP or HTTP? (...) (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) You seem to make the same mistakes as many other people: a) RSS and NNTP are two completely different things. RSS is a data format. NNTP is a data transport protocol. b) Things aren't bad, just because they're old. (...) NNTP will not become (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) Why? For futureproofing. I suspect that NNTP will decrease its 'marketshare' as time goes on whilst RSS will increase. I could be wrong about that but from reading this tree, it seems I am not the only person who has dumped NNTP for reading (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) Yes. But why would anybody do that? NNTP is (IMO) the most logical transport protocol for RSS data anyway. That hack would only be needed if you transported RSS data over a non-threaded protocol like HTTP (which unfortunately often is the (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| --SNIP-- (...) --SNIP-- I think you could run a threaded discussion running RSS. If you look at the RSS 2.0 specifications there is a tag <category> which could be used to categorise each post as a subcategory of its parent. It's not as elegant as a (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) Sensible. (...) Why not associate the format with the user account? NNTP actually has authentication built in. It's just not very common to use it. With some accounts named "<format>reader", we can let people select the format they get the FTX (...) (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Print view
|
| (...) No. It happens more often that I switch to the "Nested: All" view. Play well, Jacob (19 years ago, 30-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Print view
|
| When I print out posts from the web interface, I first switch to raw view. Do other people do that? just curious. -Suz (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | Re: Dear NNTP users,
|
| (...) This is great feedback, Jacob. Your responses make excellent points. I agree that RSS is better for seeding discussion. -Suz (19 years ago, 29-Jul-05, to lugnet.admin.general)
| | | | | 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)
|
|
