Greetings.
On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 06:42:03 +0100 -Gary- wrote:
> Suckless Team,
>
> Keep up the great work! Using dwm/dmenu makes my day, every day.
>
> I've made some enhancements to dwm which I thought others might benefit from.
> I leave the final determination to you.
>
> 1. added mo
Suckless Team,
Keep up the great work! Using dwm/dmenu makes my day, every day.
I've made some enhancements to dwm which I thought others might benefit from.
I leave the final determination to you.
1. added monitor marker to bar
https://github.com/garybgenett/.dwm/com
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:15:25 +0100
Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Just look at how it’s done in bitlbee. You have the tox account and
> there are users you open queries to. Just look at how different IRC can
> be represented in pidgin and regular IRC clients like irssi. So it
> The new UTF-8 en-/decoder implementation patch is by Damian Okrasa, not by me.
Well, my suggestion was for him (I suck because I didn't explicitily said
who was the listener).
> If he doesn't mind though, I can update it with the changes Christoph
> and I suggested. It may take me a day or two
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Roberto E. Vargas Caballero
wrote:
>> > The naming is wrong. It is just decoding »utf8« and can’t decode
>> > »utf16«. So: s,utf,utf8,g
> ...
>> utf8c is actually a Unicode point and has nothing to do with utf-8 any more.
> ...
>> Same here for u8char.
>
>
Greetings.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 15:15:25 +0100 FRIGN wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100
> Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
>
> > I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> > IRC clients. Add video support to them using SDCC and you are set. All
>
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100
Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> IRC clients. Add video support to them using SDCC and you are set. All
> of these problems have been there before. Reuse what’s being used
> > The naming is wrong. It is just decoding »utf8« and can’t decode
> > »utf16«. So: s,utf,utf8,g
...
> utf8c is actually a Unicode point and has nothing to do with utf-8 any more.
...
> Same here for u8char.
Uh, good points. The names are a bit ambiguous and should be improved.
Coul
* Christoph Lohmann 2014-03-24 14:59
> I’m waiting for bitlbee implementing tox. We already have really good
> IRC clients.
+1
then you don't impose a particular interaction scheme on everyone.
--s_
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 14:42
> On topic, I would like to know how you would implement a chat client on
> the terminal. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is all for a ii-like interface, but
> I'd be really glad to hear more opinions on that.
Here you are: I'm fine with ii
> We can definitely look at things only wit
Greetings.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:48:55 +0100 FRIGN wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:09:14 +0100
> sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
>
> On topic, I would like to know how you would implement a chat client on
> the terminal. Dmitrij D. Czarkoff is all for a ii-like interface, but
> I'd be really glad
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 07:29:54 -0600
Joshua Haase wrote:
> Have you checked retroshare? The GUI they bundle is quite bloated but I
> think it's library could be an alternative that does this. They say it's
> direct p2p connection and have VoIP. Haven't checked the code though.
Retroshare adresses
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 14:09:14 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> While I'd love to see a distributed system which comes with all benefits
> of decentralisation -- flexibility, dependability, hard to compromise,
> etc. --, I am not aware of any, so one such needs to be first
> implemented, then p
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> writes:
> XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
> you want...
>
> I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
> connections for the voice stream without any third server in the
> middle.
Have you checked retroshare?
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 12:31
> > http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
> Looks like your mail went through a meat grinder.
why? something wrong with the link? but you got there if you are citing
the video description? sorry, don't get it. It was as offtopic as it
gets anyway.
--s_
Just to make two things clear: I'm not an expert in XMPP and SIP. The
video came to my mind as I read the X argument: couldn't resist to post
it. First time I saw it I spent quite some time to figure out whether
it is fake. Ever since I love it.
* FRIGN 2014-03-24 12:56
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:3
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:36:36 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> In general, the XMPP + SIP solution makes sense to me. And since XMPP
> will be around for some time, I guess, it does not require people to get
> yet another account, i.e. it has the potential to be easily adopted
Still, XMPP is
* Nick 2014-03-24 00:01
> Indeed I'm using Jitsi at the moment, despite the fact that it's in
> Java and has an interface that you'd expect for that. But it works,
> and is quite secure over the wire, and that counts for a great deal.
Same here. I managed to force the parties I have video chat o
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 12:17:16 +0100
sta...@cs.tu-berlin.de wrote:
> which is clearly due to S
> http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
>
> (SCNR!)
>
> --s_
>
Looks like your mail went through a meat grinder.
To quote the video-description:
"Because it's all part of Barak Osama Homo bin Laden's plot to i
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 11:38:52 +0100
hiro <23h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
> you want...
Dude, I have an epiphany right now ... XML, XSLT, X11,
> I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
> connectio
* hiro 2014-03-24 11:39
> and SIP also has it's complexities
which is clearly due to S
http://youtu.be/yBkbj_S3etY
(SCNR!)
--s_
XMPP starts with X, so it sucks, and SIP also has it's complexities if
you want...
I'm sceptical about Tor's latency, I'd generally look for direct P2P
connections for the voice stream without any third server in the
middle.
Do you know of any skype-competition that correctly implements 2-way
UDP
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 9:43 AM, Christoph Lohmann <2...@r-36.net> wrote:
> Greetings.
>
> On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:43:23 +0100 "Roberto E. Vargas Caballero"
> wrote:
>> > It is number of function calls, on cat dwm
>> >
>> > cat UTF-8-demo yields:
>> > utflen 113
>> > utfencode 8152
>> > utfdecode
Greetings.
On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 09:43:23 +0100 "Roberto E. Vargas Caballero"
wrote:
> > It is number of function calls, on cat dwm
> >
> > cat UTF-8-demo yields:
> > utflen 113
> > utfencode 8152
> > utfdecode 198346
> >
> > So I think only utfdecode need to be optimised if necessary.
>
> I al
24 matches
Mail list logo
