Subj : Hello?
To   : WILLIAM MCBRINE
From : KEN HRYNCHUK
Date : Mon Mar 15 2004 03:09 pm

WILLIAM MCBRINE wrote to KEN HRYNCHUK on 03-14-04 19:52:

 KH> William, did you see my messages to you, re: lack of cleanup in this
 KH> version, and the RESET offline configuration command?

 WM> Yes. I just didn't have anything to say to the former, except perhaps
 WM> "Don't do that [mix OPX and QWK packets from the same board]." :-)

Understood. In case you're wondering why I keep both types here, Ed Koon
(Sysop of Doc's Place) has recommended the use of Multimail in OPX mode
for offline Netmail messaging, but, for everyday use, I prefer QWK,
simply because I've been using it for years, and I trust it. I was
thinking that, since you've already implemented the code to parse OPX
reply packet info., that it might be possible to re-use portions of
that code as part of an error handling strategy. But since I know
nothing about C, this may be easier said than done.

 WM> As
 WM> for RESET, are you asking me to do something with that? I didn't get
 WM> that from your message.

My initial reply to you, re: RESET, was in response to your reply to
Monica, wherein you stated that you knew of no offline configuration
command that would reset the message pointers in a given echo. My second
reply on the subject was to inform you that RESET might also allow the
pointers to be reset by date, in addition to resetting by relative
number. To me, it sounds like RESET may be worth implementing in MM, if
its prevalence warrants it, but, of course, the choice is yours.

In any case, I would've thought that one, or both, of my messages
would've warranted a reply. Given that Fido can be erratic at times, I
wasn't sure if you'd seen them.

   Ken

 
--- MultiMail/MS-DOS v0.46
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)

.