[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: LUSERS

To: Thomas Kuiper <engerim@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: LUSERS
From: "Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe" <Mario.Holbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 22:22:17 +0100
Cc: ircd-users@xxxxxxx
Delivered-to: ircd-users-out@irc.org
Delivered-to: ircd-users@irc.org
In-reply-to: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10002052208070.12518-100000@fire2.tobit.com>; from engerim@engerim.de on Sat, Feb 05, 2000 at 10:11:12PM +0100
References: <20000205220520.U13939@rubens> <Pine.LNX.4.10.10002052208070.12518-100000@fire2.tobit.com>

On Sat, Feb 05, 2000 at 10:11:12PM +0100, Thomas Kuiper wrote:
> its no problem against RFC as far as I can see, the nummeric is still
> used, and parameter 3 is still the count.
> Besides we don't show up the "and <integer> invisible on <integer>
> servers" anymore anyways, so give me a better reason :)

RFC defines numeric AND detailed reply string and clients depend on it.
This is the reason, why RFC 1459 servers cannot be localized.
No better reason needed.
We should not break RFC, if we don't really need it.
And it might make sense, if u'd read (and understand) RFC at least.

regards,
-- 
Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe <Mario.Holbe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
http://WWW.RZ.TU-Ilmenau.DE/~holbe/

User sind wie ideale Gase - sie verteilen sich gleichmaessig ueber alle Platten

Follow-Ups:
- Re: LUSERS
  - From: Thomas Kuiper
- Re: LUSERS
  - From: nobody

References:
- Re: LUSERS
  - From: Mario 'BitKoenig' Holbe
- Re: LUSERS
  - From: Thomas Kuiper

Prev by Date: Re: Too many connections
Next by Date: Re: LUSERS
Previous by thread: Re: LUSERS
Next by thread: Re: LUSERS
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread