Subj : Re: Bluewave
To   : Oli
From : apam
Date : Fri May 07 2021 09:09 pm

-=> Oli wrote to apam <=-

 Ol> QWK and Bluewave seems broken by design. The only sane format seems to
 Ol> be SOUP, but RFC822 is another can of worms regarding complexity.

I don't think they're broken. Some implementations might be broken, but
that's not the fault of the format. 

I'm sure we could design something that fits our needs better now, than 
the needs of those who designed the specs - Rob has done a good job of 
extending QWK to suit synchronets needs and maintaining backward 
compatability.

The only flaw I can see in bluewave is the one we're discussing, but that
might be me not understanding things correctly - and if I am, there are
a few ways to work around it making it a non issue.

 Ol> I never understood why people used QWK / Bluewave back in the 90s (I
 Ol> tried and was not convinced). Crosspoint or a FTN editor seemed so much
 Ol> more enjoyable to use. But I have to admit, I haven't used an offline
 Ol> reader since then. Maybe someone can remind me what the advantages of
 Ol> offline readers are?

I used it in the 90s, because the BBSes in my area only had one node, and
time limits. I could download mail and spend the rest of my time leeching
files. Rather than waste it all typing in messages.

As to why people use it now, I'm sure most don't. Tiny does, and he's
explained why, and he's really the only reason I'm adding bluewave anyway.

Andrew


.... Heisenberg may have slept here.

--- Talisman v0.21-dev (Linux/x86_64)
 * Origin: HappyLand v2.0 - telnet://happylandbbs.com:11892/ (21:1/182)

.