On Mon, 29 Sep 2014 23:21:53 +0100
Nick <suckless-dev_AT_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 <dev_AT_frign.de>
Received on Tue Sep 30 2014 - 00:43:35 CEST