* Alex de Landgraaf <alextreme@xs4all.nl> [2003-08-28 13:52]:
> Would like to note that tetrinetx and gtetrinet are already in Debian.
> Tetrinetx is the game server voor tetrinet, gtetrinet is the gtk
> tetrinet client.
I'm fully aware of this.
> Maybe something like tetrinet-ncurses is in order?
Considering it, yes.
> In any way, having two tetrinet servers would probably break something
Would break what? Sorry, we have tons of other servers doubled, like
apache and roxen; exim, postfix and sendmail; inetd and xinetd; xdm,
wdm, gdm and kdm... What shall be different in this very case? Please
be a little bit more verbose...
> (and is redundant),
Like the above. Please don't say that if you haven't compared the
posibilities of the different things, otherwise your statement is moo.
I must confess that I haven't checked the real abilities of
tetrinet-server in this package but from what I see currently is that it
is very limited. On the other hand, it is included in the upstream
source so it would maybe distract the upstream author if he see that it
is not included in the binary package.
> so at least take a look at tetrinetx and contact its maintainer to
> sync things...
Can you sync postfix with exim, please? Sorry, this sounds strange...
It is not a spin off of tetrinetx, that's the way things work in the
open source/free software community. Different people try their own
approach. Only time will tell which will stay and which will pass away.
I for myself don't like to judge these things and say: "let's kill this
off, it looks moo".
Hell, you made me defend that little 16k piece of crap, well done :-)
So long,
Alfie
--
<schneckal> hat einer von euch schon bind9 installiert?
<_eis> das neue root kit? :->
-- #debian.de
Attachment:
pgppCNxNt0v4a.pgp
Description: PGP signature