Projects / BitchX

BitchX

BitchX is the premiere IRC (Internet Relay Chat) client. It originally was a modified version of the popular ircII client, and the features were eventually merged into the EPIC IRC client. The current development is aimed at merging the client back to a current branch of EPIC and bringing compatibility and stability back to the client, while bringing the features that are BitchX into a new client.

Tags
Licenses
Operating Systems
Implementation

Recent releases

  •  20 May 2004 19:36

    Release Notes: The new version contains many bugfixes and the security patches for 1.0c19.

    •  09 Apr 2002 18:46

      Release Notes: Various minor bugs and at least one possible buffer overrun condition were adressed and fixed.

      •  09 Jan 2001 22:54

        Release Notes: This release includes new SSL support, DCC_AUTORESUME support, nonblocking connect support, and various bug fixes.

        •  18 Sep 2000 10:43

          Release Notes: This release features various new features and bugfixes.

          •  21 Mar 1999 11:14

            Release Notes: Bugfixes, plus addition of a monitoring counter that reports usage to the BitchX website.

            Recent comments

            25 Feb 2013 07:16 sinie

            Incorrect. Until otherwise stated, caf runs the project off of Sourceforge which is where www.bitchx.org is pointed to. I saw what dan said on Freenode and he's not the voice of the project.

            If caf decides to start using github as the primary codebase then we'll update the site here to reflect that change. In the meantime dan and I have had this conversation already and caf is lead on the project and if he tells me to move the pointers to github on here I will do so.

            23 Feb 2013 07:44 cz3141

            The info here is dated. Active development of BitchX continues, see http://www.bitchx.ca for project info. For current versions check out the github repository at https://github.com/BitchX .

            29 Nov 2006 09:43 svart

            DCC_MAX_AUTOGET_SIZE
            Unfortunately the DCC_MAX_AUTOGET_SIZE has some limits and cannot be set very high. I'm not sure if this is was intended to be so. --Ann (http://www.quotesdb.info)

            08 Dec 2005 07:57 sinie

            Re: New version


            >

            > %

            > % We don't have a

            > % need to sanitize and hide things from

            > % people.

            >

            >

            > There would have been no need to hide

            > only the tcl behind a binary to keep

            > from "too many implementations" of it in

            > the *first place* if that were (anywhere

            > close to being) true. When you explain

            > this w/o using an out such as "the

            > license doesnt require us to explain",

            > maybe you might have some credibility.

            > Or are you just going to redirect people

            > to the forums, only to discredit what is

            > true?

            >

            seth,

            You've proven time and again that you're only interest in

            this project is to discredit anyone associated with it.

            People do not have to justify or supply you or anyone else

            for reasons they might have in doing something such as

            pana had done with tcl.c. You're justification for bitching

            about this is simply because you can and nothing else.

            You've supplied the community with no credible truth to

            anything you've stated and you've proven beyond a doubt

            that you're intent is only to discredit and slander persons

            that in the past have been involved with the project.

            My explanations for what has transpired in the past are to

            the best of my ability to explain. pana has every right like

            any other software author to hide pieces of their code

            behind the license they are using if it allows them to do so

            simply because they can or for whatever reason they pull

            out of their ass.

            The code is what it is. It was released by pana to a

            handful of people over the years to help support various

            platforms they wanted tcl support ported. The goal was

            accomplished and it was never as big of a deal as you've

            made it out to be with these petty, childish, and

            inaccurate rants you have posted here.

            When you're able to stop making slanderous comments

            and actually show valid proof of what you're saying,

            someone will give a rats ass. As I've stated and others

            have in the past; the original tcl.c, which has been

            modified over the years, was so presented at the time to

            persons developing eggdrop at the time and at no point did

            they ever see any similarity between what pana had put

            together and what they were using. The only people that

            had a right to bitch or complain never said a word and that

            to me makes you suspect as only being a shit disturbing

            little prick that wants to cause a scene for his own

            exposure since you have no signature on radar anywhere

            else in your pathetic life.

            You can continue writing these pathetic comments,

            change gears and come after me or anyone else you like.

            The burden of proof is on your shoulders and whether

            anyone chooses to respond to your mediocre,

            hypothetical, and outright slanderous accusations is up to

            them. I've decided to let you stew from time to time and

            respond at a later date just because.. I can. I've seen

            that any direct response to you is always followed up by

            these ignorant accusations that we're hiding something or

            that we have to come up with proof to back up what we're

            saying and have been for years. Wrong. In this case the

            license clearly gives pana and anyone else using the same

            type of license the right to not disclose portions of the

            code which they author. He went the extra step, included

            others that were outsiders to review what he had wrote.

            They never came at him and they never released the code

            out of respect for pana. Others directly involved in the

            project also demonstrated the same loyalty and respect for

            pana over the years and never once released that piece of

            code except to persons who were part of the project in

            some fashion.

            Is your bitterness driven from the fact that you some how

            were attempting to be involved with the project and were

            rejected due to your fragile personality problems? It

            seems to me that you spent a lot of time flaming pana

            and others (myself included) all for some sort of attention

            you could not gain any other way? You should seriously

            seek some form of medical intervention for these issues

            and step away from your computer for a long time to

            come. You're unstable and you cry over things that only

            matter to people that have no life at all or are just trying

            to shine a spotlight on them by attempting to create

            drama where there was none. You, by example, have

            shown the community exactly the type of person you are

            with these repeated false accusations and attempts to

            discredit persons who are only doing the best they could to

            supply the public with information and access to a product

            of interest. This makes you the boy the cried wolf one too

            many times.

            Good day

            Rob Andrews

            sin@bitchx.org

            04 Mar 2005 19:16 sethstorm

            Re: New version


            >

            > We don't have a

            > need to sanitize and hide things from

            > people.

            There would have been no need to hide only the tcl behind a binary to keep from "too many implementations" of it in the *first place* if that were (anywhere close to being) true. When you explain this w/o using an out such as "the license doesnt require us to explain", maybe you might have some credibility. Or are you just going to redirect people to the forums, only to discredit what is true?

            Screenshot

            Project Spotlight

            OpenStack4j

            A Fluent OpenStack client API for Java.

            Screenshot

            Project Spotlight

            TurnKey TWiki Appliance

            A TWiki appliance that is easy to use and lightweight.