 | | Re: MPD spec
|
|
Rui: (...) It's "Ada", not "ADA"! Neither does everybody have MS-Windows installed (and I am one of them). I don't mind distributing binaries for DOS and MS-Windows, but somebody else has to compile them. [...] There is a very good reason that I (...) (25 years ago, 4-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) OK, I stand corrected ! (...) My NOTE had no intention to be ofensive. I'm sorry if you took it ofensively, that was NOT the intention. I also dislike windows, unfortunatly, some people (like me) are forced to try to work (sometimes it's (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
Rui: (...) ^^^...^^^ s/want to have/can't avoid having/ (...) The MPD format has been designed for easy handling through NNTP and SMTP, which means that I have to accept standard mail and news headers before the actual content. I don't intent to (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) Nice regular expression ! (...) There is NO problem with that, because, every mail/news reader supports the [uuencode] format and most support the [MIME] format. Maybe you just want to convert directly from a mail dump ? But that can easilly (...) (25 years ago, 8-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) I believe the answer would be Yes and Yes. Steve (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) So are you available to help define a better/improved Multi Part Dat format, not necessarilly with MPD extension ? By using your experience with the current MPD format ? including the splitter and Builder ! What would you improve ? Do you (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
Rui: (...) I do use it for "batch processing". (...) That's while I added the "NOFILE" meta-command at some point. I think it was Jeremy who made me aware of the need for that. (...) I think you could say so. I wrote the definition and the first (...) (25 years ago, 9-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) I think part of the problem is that MPD files are currently being used differently than they were originally intended. Rui's ideas would benefit a lot of people trying to make use of MPD. But these changes would defeat current uses of the (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
Steve: (...) Yes. I think that the right format for these alternative uses is gzipped tar files. There is Open Source code available for reading this format, and there is no need to go through a specification and implementation process. Play well, (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) OK! (...) Where is that documented ? Does it have parameters ? I personally, never heard about that Meta command ! Does a regular (extended) .DAT also suport this or is just an MPD specific meta command ? I think it's the later. [...SNIP. (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: MPD spec
|
|
(...) Also agree ! But, lets try to make everybody happy ! ;) (...) I don't quite agree with that, because this new format does not need to be just a way to gather a few DAT files, It can be a lot more, but without forgetting that it should be kept (...) (25 years ago, 10-Mar-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
