On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:21:53 +0100 Nick <suckless-...@njw.me.uk> wrote:
> Sounds great, good job on this. I haven't read about Tox in any > depth, so don't know how lovely or otherwise it is as a protocol. > What do you folks think? Well, as a short comment: Tox is an emerging protocol and will have its share sooner or later. > I'm not sure how I feel about using tmux as a wrapper to all this, > like hysteria. After all, we have a good X window manager, I would > have thought it would be better to make use of that. Is there a > reason you're planning to use tmux rather than dwm / X for your > wrapper client thing? persistence using dtach or similar seems less > important when you can do ssh tunneling as easily as you can with > ratox. Well, that's debatable. I run hysteria on an external server and ssh into it to use it, but ratox doesn't quite need the possibility to backlog that much. > The sort of dwm / X client I'm imagining would have a separate > program for contact list, and for each "conversation" (one window > split into input box and output). The contact list could just spawn > the conversation windows, or they could be spawned independently > with the name of the contact. 'cos ratox is handling all of the hard > stuff, windows can be closed / opened / have multiple copies without > worrying about state or anything. > > How does that sound? I'm tempted to hack something together, so > feedback would be very welcome. Well, if not tmux, why not spawn multiple terminal-windows for each function. For instance, having a terminal window with a list of friends and being able to select them could all be hacked together with a shell-script (combining xargs with a selector). Cheers FRIGN -- FRIGN <d...@frign.de>
