Re: New version
> We don't have a
> need to sanitize and hide things from
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?
Re: Follow your own advice first.
> What gives you the right to come along
> and accuse the channel ops or anyone
> else involved with this project of
> anything underhanded?
Only the tcl.c, nothing else.
> For years the only problems that have
> ever resulted of this client are people
> like you who come along and are
> irritated, turning into script kiddies,
> and pulling off stupid DDoS attacks in
> order to cause troubles on distro sites
> and insert hacked code into the client
> on fake distro sites.
> Not one time has BitchX ever had a
> release where intentional backdoors or
> hacks in the client were inserted for
> intent and use to abuse or cause issues
> with persons from a remote standpoint.
> While the project has come to a slowdown
> in development because of a changing of
> the guard, it does not mean that the
> standards of the clients release policy
> have changed. For the last 3 years I
> have managed to handle the distribution
> side of the cilent on the FTP sites and
> more recently the faq, scripts, bugs,
> forums and other resources which are now
> available for those involved in the
> continuing project.
> You've continued to spew utter nonsense
> for some time thinking that you are the
> only one that is right. The BSD License
> was adopted for this project for
> legitimate reasons by Colton and its not
> up to you or anyone else to question him
> or his code. No one that develops for
> Eggdrop has one time bitched about
> tcl.c. The debate ended a dark age ago
> and you continue to spread your opinion
> as if its a fact when you haven't once
> bothered to investigate what it is
> you're speaking about and have any
> conclusive evidence to back.
I await the facts, not a hollow defense, only on the tcl.o/tcl.c code - not the rest of the client.
> Since tcl.c has been publically release
> with the close of the 1.x BitchX project
> this debate is long since closed.
> However you are still not nor have you
> ever been in the right and you owe not
> just the people you've insulted here,
> but the community in general, an apology
> for spreading ignorance when you should
> have just RTFM.
No apology is needed or will ever arrive while the issue is this way.