Re: [UM1-coders] Ctl-S/Ctl-Q

[J.P. K. <jp...@he...>]

> The trouble is that people will insist on using brain-dead clients
> (MS Telnet is the obvious one) that wont do local line editing.
> UM has had the line editing code for some considerable time now,
> and it works as well as can be expected.

Err, if people choose to use brain dead clients then they
get what they deserve.  You cannot cater for everyone.

> The thing is that people have other needs (or desires), such as
> Keith's avatar system, which would require some sort of session
> management to remain sensible, otherwise we're going to have to
> have a custom client, and then loose a large proportion of the
> user base (or at least stop them from using the features).

Umm, again, without having studied Keith's avatar system I am
not sure why you would need to have a custom client interface
thing for them.  you just do it a line at a time with prefixes
on the lines to make it clear what is going on.  You don't want
to make the system unusable for people who aren't using telnet,
do you?

> Thats nice, but not everyone has ssh. And before you say people can
> get hold of it, I'm not supposed to have a copy on my machine, but
> I get away with it because I've got administrative rights over my
> work machine.

Umm, it wasn't meant as a solution to that problem.  It was
merely meant as a stopgap for a few people pending a better
solution.

Although, I am not sure why you need administrative rights, putty
doesn't require administrative rights, nor does a normal unix
ssh client.  Equally there are Java clients which we can make
available to people.

However, I wasn't pushing for that, or suggesting that what I
had done was a solution.  Merely mentioning it since it was
relevant to the conversation.

> I think the solution in the long term is to implement it as
> invisible as possible to the 'decent client' user, but to allow
> the 'crap client' user to still use the game.

I would agree, but again, you can't win everything.  We could, however
allow telnet access for logging in to the 'ugly' user - however
that would mean that we lost the default connect to Ugly on port
23 feature.  Unless we can get a second IP address, or the 'clever'
clients can cope with logging in via telnet which then starts up
telnet.... I am not sure.

Again, I haven't given it much thought, but you'd have to put an
obscene amount into UM1 in order to make it support clients, and
even then this would tend to break things like TF and tush.

> 
> Adrian.
> 

Julian