Remember to read Comparison page first to understand what Icecap actually even tries to be. I also updated the introduction to be better now. Maybe the comments will be of better quality now ;)

New comments here

Older comments

#1 LOL. This is totally fucking worthless. I mean we all know irssi1 was overengineered (but that was a good thing) but this? What the fuck are you smoking? IMAP? Dovecot? separating server from client? Get real faggots. All attempts to integrate irc with IM shit failed, why waste time on this, how about fixing bugs in irssi1 instead?

#2 It's not unix-way, sorry. To restore IRC session remotely you can use ssh+`GNU screen', for example. And it's not so good that ONE application do everything (100in1). I'd prefer ONE application that do IRC perfect, _another_ ONE for perfect Jabber client and so on. It's all about unix philosophy. My choose is irssi 1.

* I agree with the NO ALL-IN-ONE apps. I mean if you want to have IM in an irc client use bitlbee and improve on that as well as irssi1. Guess I'll stick with irssi prime for a looooonnnggg time... well atleast until weechat makes me a better offering.

#3 irssi2 sounds really good. Hopefully someone writes a client that remains irssi1 and works in commadline :)

#4 irssi1 + screen + ssh is a better alternative in this case: the server irssi is running on is not yours and it's firewalled so that you can only connect to port 22. Yes, you could pipe irssi2 port through an ssh pipe, but that's just inconvenient.

#5 Would it be possible to integrate GPG or other similar technology to ascertain that the man or woman you're talking to really is who he or she claims to be?

#6 Why invent a completely new protocol? Why not simply use XMPP (the Jabber one)? It seems like a perfect fit for this sort of thing.

#7 I use irssi with fserve.pl to serve files. How would dcc/scripts look in irssi2?

#8 Don't let the conservatives stop you - the separation of GUI and gateway is a logical step to take. PSYC was created with a similar point of view, although not as detailed and pragmatic as you. We shall take inspiration from that and improve our client interface abilities in PSYC, actually we would love people as competent as you to take part in such work rather than create new technologies with a similar intent. We have read through these pages and added thoughts from our point of view at http://about.psyc.pages.de/Irssi2 - but what has surprised us the most is how you can expect to replace IRC by Irssi2 servers - the challenges of routing and multicasting aren't easy to solve. IRC has done so in a rather simple way. Jabber hasn't solved them at all and is now facing serious scalability problems. PSYC has focused on these things since the very early beginnings and we have our technology available for installation today, we even have ebuilds since a few days ago (ha ha). So maybe we should find a way to agree on protocol and requirements and do a better thing together...?

#9 How is the separation of GUI and gateway a logical step? Will I be able to install irssi2 as an irssi1 gui-only (gui as in the console interface) application? I hope this will result in a fork.

Comments (last edited 2009-03-15 22:42:40 by localhost)