#183017 Could use the irc alternative

Package:
scrollz
Source:
scrollz
Description:
advanced ircII-based IRC client
Submitter:
Birzan George Cristian
Date:
2013-08-27 02:30:07 UTC
Severity:
wishlist
#183017#5
Date:
2003-03-01 18:03:56 UTC
From:
To:
After asking on debian-devel and not receiving that much feedback, I
decided to go ahead and file a wishlist bug against all console IRC
clients, suggesting that they use the irc alternative. Reasoning: they
provide the same functionality, which, according to the Policy, means
the packages _can_ use that alternative.
The only exception is epic, which _should_ use that alternative, since
epic4 and ircII are using it, and they're all quite similar. I'll file
minor bug report against epic.
#183017#10
Date:
2003-03-02 00:55:58 UTC
From:
To:
I don't personally see any real value in this; IRC clients are the sort
of thing that, in my experience, are as much of a matter of personal
choice and preference as a web browser, while not being as general a
utility as a web browser. In other words, people generally know what IRC
client they *want* and there are few circumstances where because of,
say, an external application needing to call it, simply *any* will do.

That said, if there's enough interest among the user base and
willingness among maintainers of other IRC clients, I'd be willing to do
it. I do think some discussion and a mini-policy, even if an informal
one, about what determines the alternative priority of a client would be
in order.

But to rephrase my first paragraph, I don't really see the necessity :).
What problem is it that you're trying to solve with this proposal?

(FWIW, it's not really appropriate to include non-ircII-based IRC
clients, console or not, in such an alternative unless they've been
designed with command-line ircII compatibility. IMO, of course :).
#183017#15
Date:
2003-03-02 15:33:31 UTC
From:
To:
Mike Markley <mike@markley.org>:

what's this all about?  what is this "alternative"?  is this like
xchat which has a GUI and a command-line version or rather like the
alternative browser options in w3m, which can invoke lynx or elinks
or whatever on URLs?

  clemens
#183017#20
Date:
2003-03-02 17:45:06 UTC
From:
To:
owner@bugs.debian.org (Debian Bug Tracking System):

my remark has not been a bug-report!  i was not aware that my comment
to the the scrollz list was interpreted as a bug-report.  pls
disregard my message.

  clemens
#183017#25
Date:
2013-08-27 02:26:11 UTC
From:
To:
I don't see a need for this either. I think this bug from 2003 should be closed.

Grant