Eggdrop Status Update

Wcc · Post by **Wcc** » Mon May 30, 2005 8:12 pm

I just posted an update as to the status of Eggdrop development, if anyone is interested.

http://forum.egghelp.org/viewtopic.php?t=9465

demond · Post by **demond** » Mon May 30, 2005 9:37 pm

I personally would like to see a multiserver eggdrop, but it's understandable there's pretty remote chance of that ever happening, given the amount of code rewrite necessary and rather limited (per Wcc's post) developer resources

nevertheless, the last eggdev team (eggheads) have done a great job over the years (I've been following eggdrop development since 1.1.5) and deserve all the credit for making the bot ever more robust, functional, scriptable and configurable

^DooM^ · Post by **^DooM^** » Tue May 31, 2005 2:36 am

Here here. Credits to all that have worked on eggdrop you have brought endless hours of fun and frustration to so many. I hope you continue on to at least version 3

Post by **Sir_Fz** » Tue May 31, 2005 5:32 am

^DooM^ wrote:Here here. Credits to all that have worked on eggdrop you have brought endless hours of fun and frustration to so many. I hope you continue on to at least version 3

word, let's hope the best for the future (with version 3

)

De Kus · Post by **De Kus** » Tue May 31, 2005 6:49 am

I was often considering triing to search for myself, but always when I look at the source code, I get somehow they feeling of 2 things:
1st: there were quite some changes in the 10 years
2nd: I have forgotten too much, since I read a basic C manual

and dont tell me to read one of these online manuals... just looking at them lets my head spine, because they are written in too hard englisch for me

.

Must be quite some hard job. Sometimes people report bugs you can't reproduce, so I kind of understand the problems.

PS: why did you set the changelog to ignore in the CVS trees? I loved that file, because it was the best and easiest indicator if there has been some changes since last time. Using command line CVS isnt my favorite

.

Galadhrim · Post by **Galadhrim** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:13 pm

doesnt the botnet kindof make up for not having a multiserver bot? still u have 2 processes but you can easily make 2 conf files and boot 2 bots with the same user/chan files. they dont take that much cpu...

demond · Post by **demond** » Wed Jun 01, 2005 4:09 pm

Galadhrim wrote:doesnt the botnet kindof make up for not having a multiserver bot? still u have 2 processes but you can easily make 2 conf files and boot 2 bots with the same user/chan files. they dont take that much cpu...

yeah, but instead of having to maintain several sets of parameterized configs (as in my situation - I run handful of bots, 1 bot per network), I'd prefer to have it all in one place; and the one-vs-many processes consideration can be of great significance when you are on a limited shell account (not my case, but the case of the majority eggdrop owners I'd imagine)

YooHoo · Post by **YooHoo** » Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:10 am

demond wrote:yeah, but instead of having to maintain several sets of parameterized configs (as in my situation - I run handful of bots, 1 bot per network), I'd prefer to have it all in one place; and the one-vs-many processes consideration can be of great significance when you are on a limited shell account (not my case, but the case of the majority eggdrop owners I'd imagine)

sounds like a shining example of the usefulness of psyBNC's

demond · Post by **demond** » Sat Jun 04, 2005 11:27 am

psyBNC... if it had some semi-useful scripting engine it would be priceless

alas, simply piping output and couple of events to external programs is not enough