I have couple of questions about ecwebv3 :
echicken wrote to Tony <=-
That said, the new web UI currently only works with recent builds of Synchronet 3.17. If that's a problem for you, let me know - I plan on tidying things up soon to make it compatible with 3.16+, and I'll get
it done sooner if this is preventing anyone from making the switch. I don't want to leave anyone stuck with v3, but I also will not be maintaining or supporting it any longer.
The 3.17 requirement is currently stopping me from using ecweb v4. That may or may not change.
That said, the new web UI currently only works with recent builds of
Synchronet 3.17. If that's a problem for you, let me know - I plan
on tidying things up soon to make it compatible with 3.16+, and I'll
get it done sooner if this is preventing anyone from making the
switch. I don't want to leave anyone stuck with v3, but I also will
not be maintaining or supporting it any longer.
The 3.17 requirement is currently stopping me from using ecweb v4.
That may or may not change.
echicken wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I prefer that my stuff works with the latest release of Synchronet, up
to a certain point. Going forward, I'll try to keep a closer eye on
that. In this case it shouldn't be a huge effort to bring the web UI
back into compatibility with 3.16c, so I'll look into it shortly.
However I don't want to recommend that people jump to unstable (dev/latest) builds unless it's really required for what they're trying
to do. Plus we're only 14 months out from the last release, which
isn't bad in this space.
A new release would be welcome though. Whatever changes have happened since 3.16c, the new voting features are nice and it'd be great to have more widespread participation in that system.
I agree on the new release, though I don't have any interest in the voting features (doesn't look useful to us offline readers). My interests in a new version include IPv6 and some fixes regarding FTM - email address translations that are mostly cosmetic. Both of these are addressed in the
I'm not ruling out an upgrade, but I will need to be sure of what I'm doing. :)
mark lewis wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
how so? what is it about 3.17 that keeps you from pulling it from the
repo and compiling your own working copy?
echicken wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
I've yet to concern myself with IPv6 even though I probably should have taken an interest years ago. FTN stuff is not of interest to me at the moment, though I occasionally consider taking it up again. I'm sure
there have been plenty of other useful changes & fixes in the intermin apart from all of this though.
IIRC the IPv6 stuff was being worked on but wasn't brought in until
after 3.16c. DM wanted to get another release out before potentially breaking tons of stuff and then spending time on sorting it all out. I suspect most of that work is done now, but I dunno.
I'm not ruling out an upgrade, but I will need to be sure of what I'm doing. :)
It's generally pretty easy, but the steps involved will depend a bit on your platform, etc. I can't remember if it was you who was running it
on a Pi or someone else; maybe there are some wrinkles there.
to QWK, but I won't be changing to binkit, I'm too happy with binkd to change (and binkd alredy has IPv6 down pat :) ).
That's correct, have to upgrade to 3.17 to get IPv6.
Yes, I'm on a Pi 1B+. Last time I attempted to compile, it took hours, then failed (can't recall the error), but there has since been some
uncertainty about how to go about it, as people have mentioned an upgrade from 3.16c requires a lot less compilation - which suggests some
interaction with old source (or more correctly, object files), which muddies the waters.
Re: Information about ecwebv3Synchronet
By: Tony to All on Wed Dec 14 2016 12:32:46
I have couple of questions about ecwebv3 :
The official answer is: don't use it. I've written a whole new (and much better) web UI since then, and I don't plan on going back to fix anything in ecweb v3. The new web UI is the fix for any problems with v3.
So, use this instead:
https://github.com/echicken/synchronet-web-v4
That said, the new web UI currently only works with recent builds of
3.17. If that's a problem for you, let me know - I plan on tidying things up soon to make it compatible with 3.16+, and I'll get it done sooner if this is preventing anyone from making the switch. I don't want to leave anyone stuck with v3, but I also will not be maintaining or supporting it any longer.
The new web UI (linked above) will be supported in the long term.
echicken wrote to Tony Langdon <=-
There's not much reason to switch to binkit if you already have
something that works. It's mostly there for people who don't already
have a mailer in place, or masochists.
That's correct, have to upgrade to 3.17 to get IPv6.
Yes, no confusion on that point. What I was getting at was that
ironing out IPv6 was to be the next major thing before another release would be possible. (Not that it means a release will just happen when that's "done".)
Yes, I'm on a Pi 1B+. Last time I attempted to compile, it took hours, then failed (can't recall the error), but there has since been some
Ouch. I've never tried cross-compiling Synchronet, but I wonder if it might be worth the effort of getting yourself set up for that in order
to save some time.
uncertainty about how to go about it, as people have mentioned an upgrade from 3.16c requires a lot less compilation - which suggests some
Been too long since I went through that process to really comment on
it. I expect it would still take a while.
interaction with old source (or more correctly, object files), which muddies the waters.
It's not something that you would need to worry too much about unless you've moved or deleted those files, I wouldn't think.
At any rate, I'll get to work on making my web-UI 3.16-friendly again - but with any luck you'll be joining us here on the bleeding edge before long.
The official answer is: don't use it. I've written a whole new (and much better) web UI since then, and I don't plan on going back to fix anything in ecweb v3. The new web UI is the fix for any problems with v3.
So, use this instead:
https://github.com/echicken/synchronet-web-v4
One thing I've wondered is, why did you remove LightIRC in v4? It was in v3 and I don't see it in v4. Unless I'm missing something?
However, if people really want to embed an IRC client on their
website, I can cook up a page (or include on the default home page)
that works with kiwiIRC, which looked decent the last time I saw it.
hopefully something HTML5 based since flash is being flushed most everywhere... but maybe javascript can handle it?
hopefully something HTML5 based since flash is being flushed most everywhere...
but maybe javascript can handle it?
Basically I didn't include it because it's flash-based, and because unless someone happens to be present on IRC at the time, it ends up being a pointless experience for the user.
However, if people really want to embed an IRC client on their website, I can cook up a page (or include on the default home page) that works with kiwiIRC, which looked decent the last time I saw it.
I suppose people don't use the IRC server much on a BBS. I was just curious.
hopefully something HTML5 based since flash is being flushed most
everywhere... but maybe javascript can handle it?
That would be the plan. I dropped the previous IRC client mostly
because it was Flash-based, so I wouldn't want to take a big step backwards.
hopefully something HTML5 based since flash is being flushed most
everywhere... but maybe javascript can handle it?
I've been hearing for years that Flash is on its way out, yet I keep getting Flash updates on my desktop PC.. It seems Adobe is still supporting it, at least..
It is however quite simple to add pages to this web interface, so there's nothing stopping anyone from adding a client to their site if they wish.
| Sysop: | Winzlo |
|---|---|
| Location: | Minnesota, USA |
| Users: | 11 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 495932:45:42 |
| Calls: | 82 |
| Files: | 1,070 |
| D/L today: |
27 files (11,920K bytes) |
| Messages: | 286,910 |