[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Patches and Matches
- Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2000 11:39:13 +0900
- From: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Patches and Matches
> > Give us a procedure for creating extensions, and we'll get hopping.
> > :]
Well, in the package that I sent to Oz which was eventually to become
44.4, I included an extension template. I'll make that more widely
available. It'll appear as http://www.infobot.org/patches/Extension.pl
in about ten hours time.
Speaking of which, what should I be doing with the versioning at
the moment? I can't find copies of 0.44.4 source anywhere - this was
the one that introduced channel-specific option support: was that
ever released, or should we consider the current purl to be a 44.4
release? My understanding is that I should diff purl against 0.44.3,
clean up the diff, apply, and then CVS. I await further instructions. :)
> I'm not sure channel status is a good metric for the bulk of
> conversation. We're always +s. i think people running bots
> shoiuld be able to set policies on channels; i think that's
> cleaner. channels are rarely toggeld between +/-s.
I'm actually all for individual users being able to set how much
they want to be watched. Did I already say that? But yes, we have
channel options. Let's use them.
> > I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but it would be nice if purl
> > had a list of servers to choose from, so that she would come back
> > if her current server went down.
(One of Samay's patches does this, which IMO should be merged in -
see the patch site)
> She needs to be on irc.infobot.org at the same time!
I've solved this the naive way by simply cloning her. :)
Actually I'm really unsure as to whether hacking infobot to span servers
would be more trouble than it's worth - you have to start carrying lots
of state around. I'll have to examine it in more detail.
> > > purl, literal what I want => <reply>why do you ask what you want?
> > Very good idea, though s/=>/is/ will save confusion.
> > Then again, when has that ever been a goal of software design.... ;)
> Ah, good point. i didn't read that well enough. there's
> a discussion on syntax here, i guess...
I was quite deliberate in *not* choosing `is' there. This is meant to
be a literal input, and this no escaping needs to be necessary. Using
`is' as delimiter would mean that you can't use it in your input. I'm
hoping it's unlikely that people will want to use `=>' in their factoids.
This won't work:
literal what is the time is <reply>It is time you got a watch
literal what is the time => <reply>It is time you got a watch
Everything else looks cool. :)