• Mystic QWK vs FTN

    From Black Panther@21:1/186 to All on Monday, September 02, 2019 13:52:36
    Hi All,

    Here at CRBBS, I have been obtaining both Dovenet via QWK, and the Synchronet echos via Fidonet. I know it's causing duplication, but I wanted to carry both on here.

    One thing I've noticed, is that messages coming in via QWK, seem to have the text cut off in mid-message. I'm not sure if this is a Mystic issue, or what, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I'll show examples in this message as well.

    Another thing I've noticed lately, is word wrapping seems to get messed up in incoming messages. I haven't noticed it with other Mystic systems, but from other software it has been a bit of a pain to read these messages. You will see that in the examples below as well.

    I know the word wrap issue is not just from Synchronet, as others using BBBS for example, have had the same thing.

    For the record, I'm using Mystic, but hpt is being used as my tosser. It is very possible the word wrapping is something with hpt, but I'm just not sure.

    The first copy of this message is what I received via QWK:

    @VIA: SESTAR @MSGID: <5D6D04B6.6242.dove-syncdisc@sestar.synchro.net> @REPLY: <5D6CE90A.4578.dove-syncdisc@bbs.leenooks.net> @TZ: c12c
    Re: GIT
    By: Alterego to Digital Man on Mon Sep 02 2019 20:03:54


    Not really. It doesn't tell me what revision of exec/load/sbbsdefs.js you have (as a random example). And it doesn't tell me (or anyone else) if the
    revision you have of that file is newer than the revision which includes he fix for the problem being discussed.

    I guess I dont understand your thinking. I've certainly used CVS before and
    urrently use git, and I find supporting downstream users far easier with a git nvironment (and that use case is well used). IE: By knowing what
    hash or tag they've checked out, I know what their source enviroment looks (
    r should) look like.

    you're thinking of the snapshot hash of the entire source tree... so what happe s if i go in and manually grab the source to (eg) binkit by copying the source rom the view window (copy'n'pasta) instead of using git to grab it? i've now go
    the/some sourc

    it may be possible to do this internal revision number for each file by scripti g something in the hooks available in git when files/changes are uploaded to gi ... one of the projects i work with does similar but not for revision numbers..
    they check oth


    )\/(ark

    The next, is the same message received via FTN:

    Re: GIT
    By: Alterego to Digital Man on Mon Sep 02 2019 20:03:54


    Not really. It doesn't tell me what revision of exec/load/sbbsdefs.js you have (as a random example). And it doesn't tell me (or anyone else) if the
    revision you have of that file is newer than the revision which includes he fix for the problem being discussed.

    I guess I dont understand your thinking. I've certainly used CVS before and
    urrently use git, and I find supporting downstream users far easier with a git nvironment (and that use case is well used). IE: By knowing what
    hash or tag they've checked out, I know what their source enviroment looks (
    r should) look like.

    you're thinking of the snapshot hash of the entire source tree... so what happe s if i go in and manually grab the source to (eg) binkit by copying the source rom the view window (copy'n'pasta) instead of using git to grab it? i've now go
    the/some source for binkit that is behind or beyond the current hash my system carries... if i have problems and you ask for the hash, i give it to you but my binkit sources do not match with the binkit sources in that hash... if there wa
    an automated method to assign and increment a version number inside each file, you would know immediately where the problem resides... can you see the problem now?

    it may be possible to do this internal revision number for each file by scripti g something in the hooks available in git when files/changes are uploaded to gi ... one of the projects i work with does similar but not for revision numbers..
    they check other things and either accept or reject the update/upload... i'd h ve to ask their git guru if assigning/updating internal revision numbers is pos ible via this method... that's why i started this paragraph with "may be" ;)

    )\/(ark

    As you can see, the message received via QWK is missing almost three lines of text at the end of the message, but still has the signature. Also, the word wrapping also makes it difficult to read the message.


    ... Anywhere You Go ... There You Are !

    ___ MultiMail/Linux v0.51

    --- Mystic BBS/QWK v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From Al@21:4/106 to Black Panther on Monday, September 02, 2019 13:26:06
    Hi All,

    Here at CRBBS, I have been obtaining both Dovenet via QWK, and the Synchronet
    echos via Fidonet. I know it's causing duplication, but I wanted to carry both
    on here.

    I always did that too on SBBS. I read/posted messages on DOVE-Net but had the gated areas on fido also, for FTN types.

    One thing I've noticed, is that messages coming in via QWK, seem to have the text cut off in mid-message. I'm not sure if this is a Mystic issue, or what, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I'll show examples in this message as well.

    There has been a lot going on with SBBS lately to do with UTF-8 and other things. I don't know but I wonder if you would have better luck with a recent build of SBBS, if it's not already upto date?

    Another thing I've noticed lately, is word wrapping seems to get messed up in incoming messages. I haven't noticed it with other Mystic systems, but from other software it has been a bit of a pain to read these messages. You will see that in the examples below as well.

    I see that too. If I'm not mistaken (and I might be) messasges written on a terminal >80 characters wide seem to have the wrapping a little off. I suspect they would look good on a terminal >80 characters wide but on my 80 character screen they are hard to read.

    For the record, I'm using Mystic, but hpt is being used as my tosser. It is very possible the word wrapping is something with hpt, but I'm just not sure.

    No, I think you'll have the same result with mutil or hpt.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (21:4/106)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Al on Monday, September 02, 2019 16:18:28
    On 02 Sep 2019, Al said the following...

    There has been a lot going on with SBBS lately to do with UTF-8 and other things. I don't know but I wonder if you would have better luck with a recent build of SBBS, if it's not already upto date?

    Well, I'm using Mystic to pull in the QWK feed from Vert. I'm wondering if I could set up a fakenet, and use my SBBS setup to pull Dovenet, that would
    feed my Mystic setup...

    I see that too. If I'm not mistaken (and I might be) messasges written
    on a terminal >80 characters wide seem to have the wrapping a little
    off. I suspect they would look good on a terminal >80 characters wide
    but on my 80 character screen they are hard to read.

    I know that Synchronet now has the ability to use >80 width, but other
    systems, as far as I know, don't. I believe I've also seen this with other systems as well. I'll have to keep a closer eye on those messages to see
    where they are originating.

    I have also noticed that on Mystic, if you import a message via file upload into a message, the word wrap seems to mess up as well. It will cut words and characters will be missing... That's why I'm thinking it might be a Mystic bug...

    For the record, I'm using Mystic, but hpt is being used as my tosser. It very possible the word wrapping is something with hpt, but I'm just not

    No, I think you'll have the same result with mutil or hpt.

    That was my thoughts as well, but wanted to at least mention it. :)


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From Alterego@21:2/116 to Black Panther on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 08:56:25
    Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: Black Panther to All on Mon Sep 02 2019 01:52 pm

    One thing I've noticed, is that messages coming in via QWK, seem to have
    the text cut off in mid-message. I'm not sure if this is a Mystic issue, or what, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I'll show
    examples in this message as well.

    Another thing I've noticed lately, is word wrapping seems to get messed up
    in incoming messages. I haven't noticed it with other Mystic systems, but from other software it has been a bit of a pain to read
    these messages. You will see that in the examples below as well.
    I know the word wrap issue is not just from Synchronet, as others using
    BBBS for example, have had the same thing.

    For the record, I'm using Mystic, but hpt is being used as my tosser. It
    is very possible the word wrapping is something with hpt, but I'm just not sure.

    So I would report it as well to DM and potentially Nightfox might be interested
    as well (if you havent).

    Is it just my messages that are messed up?

    I am noticing some odities with message wrapping - and you will have seen me discuss this in the past in Synchronet. I've actually think I've proved it to be Slyedit and UTF8 terminals and a wide screen (which is what I use - and my screen is 212x57) - and I'm just doing some testing to validate that claim before I give DM/Nightfox some data to work with (if they are concerned).

    Although in my testing, if I'm using a CP437 terminal (like Syncterm), regardless of the width, the wrapping issue doesnt appear to affect me - but then thats me re-reading what I've posted on SBBS.
    ...ëîåã

    ... Alimony is like buying oats for a dead horse.
    --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Alterant | An SBBS in Docker on Pi! (21:2/116)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Alterego on Monday, September 02, 2019 19:05:18
    On 03 Sep 2019, Alterego said the following...

    So I would report it as well to DM and potentially Nightfox might be interested as well (if you havent).

    I haven't yet, as I wanted to narrow it down to to only Synchronet systems. I thought there were other bbs systems that were doing the same thing.

    Is it just my messages that are messed up?

    Nope, right now I can verify that it's just about all Synchronet systems.

    I am noticing some odities with message wrapping - and you will have
    seen me discuss this in the past in Synchronet. I've actually think I've proved it to be Slyedit and UTF8 terminals and a wide screen (which is

    I've seen the discussions, I just haven't followed them as closely as I
    should have.

    what I use - and my screen is 212x57) - and I'm just doing some testing
    to validate that claim before I give DM/Nightfox some data to work with (if they are concerned).

    As soon as I can obtain some more information, I'll present it to them from this end as well.


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From Al@21:4/106 to Black Panther on Monday, September 02, 2019 18:35:32
    Well, I'm using Mystic to pull in the QWK feed from Vert.

    Hopefully we won't lose compatibility and the option to do this.

    I'm wondering if I could set up a fakenet, and use my SBBS setup to pull Dovenet, that would feed my Mystic setup...

    You could pull DOVE-Net with SBBS and gate the areas to FTN and pass them to Mystic that way. I think Nick does this already and might provide a feed but I'm not sure of that.

    I know that Synchronet now has the ability to use >80 width, but other systems, as far as I know, don't. I believe I've also seen this with other systems as well. I'll have to keep a closer eye on those messages to see where they are originating.

    This issue has been around for a long time. I think BBS authors have stuck pretty close to the 80x25 screen layout but that screen size is not the norm anymore.

    I have also noticed that on Mystic, if you import a message via file upload into a message, the word wrap seems to mess up as well. It will cut words and characters will be missing... That's why I'm thinking it might be a Mystic bug...

    You might have to prepare that upload in advance so it fits on the screen without losing any details.

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (21:4/106)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Alterego on Monday, September 02, 2019 19:44:20
    On 03 Sep 2019, Alterego said the following...

    I am noticing some odities with message wrapping - and you will have
    seen me discuss this in the past in Synchronet. I've actually think I've proved it to be Slyedit and UTF8 terminals and a wide screen (which is what I use - and my screen is 212x57) - and I'm just doing some testing
    to validate that claim before I give DM/Nightfox some data to work with (if they are concerned).

    I just did a quick search in the Fido Synchronet echo. Here is a brief list
    of headers from messages where the wrapping is messed up on this end. It doesn't seem to be confined to one editor. (I do like the @NOTE addition to
    the kludge lines...) Also, the '@' have been removed, to protect the innocent... :)

    #TZUTC: -0700
    #MSGID: 7130.sync@1:103/705 21d2bc76
    #REPLY: 7121.sync@1:103/705 21d2981a
    #PID: Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 Aug 26 2019 MSC 1922
    #TID: SBBSecho 3.09-Linux r3.140 Sep 2 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #COLS: 80
    #CHRS: CP437 2
    #NOTE: SlyEdit 1.70 (2019-08-15) (ICE style)

    #TZUTC: -0400
    #MSGID: 7115.sync@1:103/705 21d25935
    #REPLY: 7107.sync@1:103/705 21d24167
    #PID: Synchronet 3.17c-Linux Sep 1 2019 GCC 7.4.0
    #TID: SBBSecho 3.09-Linux r3.140 Sep 2 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #CHRS: CP437 2
    #NOTE: FSEditor.js v1.103

    #TZUTC: -0300
    #MSGID: 7109.sync@1:103/705 21d255ab
    #PID: Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 Aug 14 2019 MSC 1921
    #TID: SBBSecho 3.09-Linux r3.140 Sep 2 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #CHRS: CP437 2 #NOTE: SlyEdit 1.68 (2019-08-09)

    #TZUTC: -0700
    #MSGID: 7108.sync@1:103/705 21d2438a
    #REPLY: 7107.sync@1:103/705 21d24167
    #PID: Synchronet 3.17c-Win32 Sep 2 2019 MSC 1922
    #TID: SBBSecho 3.09-Linux r3.140 Aug 31 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #COLS: 80
    #CHRS: CP437 2
    #NOTE: FSEditor.js v1.103

    #TZUTC: 1000
    #MSGID: 7107.sync@1:103/705 21d24167
    #REPLY: 7105.sync@1:103/705 21d2206a
    #PID: Synchronet 3.17c-Linux Aug 29 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #TID: SBBSecho 3.09-Linux r3.140 Aug 31 2019 GCC 6.3.0
    #CHRS: CP437 2
    #NOTE: SlyEdit 1.70 (2019-08-15) (ICE style)


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Alterego on Monday, September 02, 2019 19:49:02
    On 03 Sep 2019, Alterego said the following...

    I am noticing some odities with message wrapping - and you will have
    seen me discuss this in the past in Synchronet. I've actually think I've proved it to be Slyedit and UTF8 terminals and a wide screen (which is

    One last observation from this end. It seems it's not just Synchronet. I just noticed a new message that came through SoupGate on Paul's system, into the Fido Commodore echo...

    #REPLYADDR rbernardo@iglou.com
    #REPLYTO 3:770/3.0 UUCP
    #MSGID: <9f247101-bef6-4c6a-8ea1-7d1ff09f6e11@googlegroups.com> a290fc1f #REPLY: 2806:770/1.0 21d29873
    #PID: SoupGate-Win32 v1.05

    I have a composite/s-video-to-HDMI converter that does well with the conve sion (so well that Ray Carlsen bought one for himself). You can find it at


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From ryan@21:1/168 to Black Panther on Monday, September 02, 2019 21:30:48
    I know that Synchronet now has the ability to use >80 width, but other systems, as far as I know, don't. I believe I've also seen this with
    other systems as well. I'll have to keep a closer eye on those messages
    to see where they are originating.

    I've mentioned this to DM in the past, and his reply was basically that BBS softwares need to figure out how to format messages no matter how many
    columns or what type of quoting schema they use.

    He also sent links to a written standard which describes message formats and more or less demonstrates that Synchronet is the only BBS which is actually doing things correctly.

    In any case, Synchronet is the only BBS software that does it right, as far
    as I can tell, and all these other boards (to include legacy softwares reasonable for hobbyists to want to run and use in FTN, which aren't
    softwares we may ever see get updated) are basically hosed on message formats for things that have circulated through SBBS boards.

    No disrespect intended to DM, I just find this whole thing frustrating. I
    guess if there are Synchronet-only networks, maybe they can use the compliant message schema, but if it's intended for communication with multiple BBS softwares, can we maybe do quoting and line wrapping the way everyone else does?

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to Black Panther on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 15:06:43
    Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: Black Panther to All on Mon Sep 02 2019 01:52 pm

    Hi All,

    Here at CRBBS, I have been obtaining both Dovenet via QWK, and the Synchronet echos via Fidonet. I know it's causing duplication, but I wanted to carry both on here.

    One thing I've noticed, is that messages coming in via QWK, seem to have the text cut off in mid-message. I'm not sure if this is a Mystic issue, or what, but I thought I'd throw it out there. I'll show examples in this message as well.

    Make sure you have your QWKnet account configured to strip Ctrl-A codes (likely
    treated as FTN kludge lines by Mystic) and probably don't want to includes QWK
    Kludges either (MSGID/REPLY/VIA/TZ) - as they're also not supported by Mystic.

    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #23:
    David St. Hubbins: I envy us.
    Norco, CA WX: 93.4øF, 40.0% humidity, 13 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to ryan on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 15:13:01
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: ryan to Black Panther on Mon Sep 02 2019 09:30 pm

    I know that Synchronet now has the ability to use >80 width, but other systems, as far as I know, don't. I believe I've also seen this with other systems as well. I'll have to keep a closer eye on those messages to see where they are originating.

    I've mentioned this to DM in the past, and his reply was basically that BBS softwares need to figure out how to format messages no matter how many columns or what type of quoting schema they use.

    He also sent links to a written standard which describes message formats and more or less demonstrates that Synchronet is the only BBS which is actually doing things correctly.

    In any case, Synchronet is the only BBS software that does it right, as far as I can tell, and all these other boards (to include legacy softwares reasonable for hobbyists to want to run and use in FTN, which aren't softwares we may ever see get updated) are basically hosed on message formats for things that have circulated through SBBS boards.

    No disrespect intended to DM, I just find this whole thing frustrating. I guess if there are Synchronet-only networks, maybe they can use the compliant message schema, but if it's intended for communication with multiple BBS softwares, can we maybe do quoting and line wrapping the way everyone else does?

    Can you be more specific? Which written standard?

    If you're talking about long-line-paragraphs, 2 Synchronet editors (fseditor.js
    and slyedit.js) only *recently* started storing written messages in that way. And that behavior is configureable.

    Synchronet is hardly the first BBS software to support storing/reading messages
    with long-line-paragraphs. Many other BBS programs/editors have been storing message body text in that way for decades. Synchronet was rather late to the game in that regard.

    Or maybe I have no idea what you're referring... <shrug>

    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #14:
    The Boston gig has been cancelled. [Don't] worry, it's not a big college town. Norco, CA WX: 93.2øF, 41.0% humidity, 11 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Digital Man on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 16:41:44
    On 03 Sep 2019, Digital Man said the following...

    Make sure you have your QWKnet account configured to strip Ctrl-A codes (likely treated as FTN kludge lines by Mystic) and probably don't want
    to includes QWK Kludges either (MSGID/REPLY/VIA/TZ) - as they're also
    not supported by Mystic.

    Hi DM,

    Got it changed now. The Ctrl-A codes and most of the kludges were on.

    We'll see what happens when some new messages come through.

    Didn't even think to check the QWK settings.

    Thanks DM!


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to Black Panther on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 20:38:50
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: Black Panther to Digital Man on Tue Sep 03 2019 04:41 pm

    On 03 Sep 2019, Digital Man said the following...

    Make sure you have your QWKnet account configured to strip Ctrl-A codes (likely treated as FTN kludge lines by Mystic) and probably don't want to includes QWK Kludges either (MSGID/REPLY/VIA/TZ) - as they're also not supported by Mystic.

    Hi DM,

    Got it changed now. The Ctrl-A codes and most of the kludges were on.

    We'll see what happens when some new messages come through.

    Didn't even think to check the QWK settings.

    Thanks DM!

    Yeah, no problem. The Ctrl-A codes would explain why a lot of the message text was missing. The QWK kludges are those @VIA, etc. lines you see at the top of messages.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #31:
    The Synchronet IRC server (ircd) was written in JS by Randy Sommerfeld (Cyan). Norco, CA WX: 81.8øF, 51.0% humidity, 7 mph ENE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From Black Panther@21:1/186 to Digital Man on Tuesday, September 03, 2019 22:28:40
    On 03 Sep 2019, Digital Man said the following...

    Yeah, no problem. The Ctrl-A codes would explain why a lot of the
    message text was missing. The QWK kludges are those @VIA, etc. lines you see at the top of messages.

    I had never even looked at those settings since I set up Dovenet, and I was using Synchronet at the time.

    It seems as though the messages in Dovenet are looking normal again. The word-wrapping seems to be a bit messed up yet, but I'm thinking that might be
    a Mystic issue.

    Thanks again.


    ---

    Black Panther(RCS)
    Castle Rock BBS

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: Castle Rock BBS - bbs.castlerockbbs.com (21:1/186)
  • From ryan@21:1/168 to Digital Man on Wednesday, September 04, 2019 05:18:07
    If you're talking about long-line-paragraphs, 2 Synchronet editors (fseditor.js and slyedit.js) only *recently* started storing written messages in that way. And that behavior is configureable.

    It's possible I'm not talking about the same thing as everyone else in the thread. *shrug*

    What I'm discussing is not only long line paragraphs, but long line paragraph quoting. Essentially I expect if someone with a Synchronet BBS responds to
    this message and quotes me, there will be lines similar to
    blah blah blah (past column 80)...
    ....blah blah
    this is the second quoted line (past 80)...
    ....blah blah blah

    Instead of
    Line one, up last word of line ends prior to column 80
    Line two begins
    Line three
    etc

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to ryan on Wednesday, September 04, 2019 18:18:27
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: ryan to Digital Man on Wed Sep 04 2019 05:18 am

    If you're talking about long-line-paragraphs, 2 Synchronet editors (fseditor.js and slyedit.js) only *recently* started storing written messages in that way. And that behavior is configureable.

    It's possible I'm not talking about the same thing as everyone else in the thread. *shrug*

    What I'm discussing is not only long line paragraphs, but long line paragraph quoting. Essentially I expect if someone with a Synchronet BBS responds to
    this message and quotes me, there will be lines similar to
    blah blah blah (past column 80)...
    ....blah blah
    this is the second quoted line (past 80)...
    ....blah blah blah

    Instead of
    Line one, up last word of line ends prior to column 80
    Line two begins
    Line three
    etc

    Ah. Well Synchronet's internal message re-flow (line/word-wrap) logic does handle re-flowing of quote lines just fine, so it is possible that's an issue for systems that can't do that. Unfortunately, in a world where not everyone is
    using exactly an 80 column terminals (some fewere, some more), it is best to not make assumptions and just use longe-line-paragraphs and let the viewer handle the display to the user based on the display environment at the time.

    We do have options to change the behavior of quoted text, but I have have me system/editor set to maximize the use of wide terminals while displaying nicely
    in 40-column (e.g. C64) terminals as well. If I just forced all quoted to wrap
    assuming a 79/80 column terminal (which is an option), the results are not nearly as universally flexible.

    digital man

    This Is Spinal Tap quote #18:
    Sustain, listen to it. Don't hear anything. You would though were it playing. Norco, CA WX: 88.4øF, 42.0% humidity, 10 mph E wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From ryan@21:1/168 to Digital Man on Thursday, September 05, 2019 04:36:10
    Ah. Well Synchronet's internal message re-flow (line/word-wrap) logic
    does handle re-flowing of quote lines just fine, so it is possible
    that's an issue for systems that can't do that. Unfortunately, in a
    world where not everyone is using exactly an 80 column terminals (some fewere, some more), it is best to not make assumptions and just use longe-line-paragraphs and let the viewer handle the display to the user based on the display environment at the time.

    Yep, sounds like this is the core of the issue - there really aren't any BBS softwares out there as modern and/or feature rich as Synchronet. In fact I don't know of any other which appear dos-based and are popular in the same
    type of use case. NB, door games assume 80 column terminals.

    We do have options to change the behavior of quoted text, but I have
    have me system/editor set to maximize the use of wide terminals while displaying nicely in 40-column (e.g. C64) terminals as well. If I just forced all quoted to wrap assuming a 79/80 column terminal (which is an option), the results are not nearly as universally flexible.

    On the one hand I agree and admire the flexibility but on the other hand I
    have to emphasize how no other software (particularly legacy ones which
    happen to be popular in this hobby) think in those terms. Really much of the BBS world assumes a fixed 80x25ish terminal.

    --- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/03/02 (Linux/64)
    * Origin: monterey bbs (21:1/168)
  • From HusTler@21:4/10 to Digital Man on Thursday, September 05, 2019 18:37:55
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: Digital Man to ryan on Wed Sep 04 2019 06:18 pm

    Ah. Well Synchronet's internal message re-flow (line/word-wrap) logic does handle re-flowing of quote lines just fine, so it is possible that's an issue for systems that can't do that. Unfortunately, in a world where not everyone is
    assuming a 79/80 column terminal (which is an option), the results are not nearly as universally flexible.

    Maybe this is off topic but I'm wondering why the push for UTF-8 compatability?
    Is that going to be a users choice in Synchronet? Or will it be Autodetected? When I first got back into BBSing I found some boards even asked to chose between UTF-8 or CP437? So now the user needs to know if they are using UTF or CP437 with ANSI or without? I also see some new graphic Demo on Vert.(Very Cool) Where is BBSing going with all this? Inquisitive minds want to know. ;-)

    ---
    þ Synchronet þ Havens BBS havens.synchro.net
    * Origin: fsxNet FTN<>QWK Gateway (21:4/10)
  • From Al@21:4/106 to HusTler on Thursday, September 05, 2019 17:46:42
    I also see some new graphic Demo on Vert.(Very Cool)

    It is. There is one on deuce's BBS too at nix.synchro.net that uses sixel graphics that is only supported with newer 1.1b versions of SyncTERM.

    Where is BBSing going with all this? Inquisitive minds want to know. ;-)

    You can use those kind of graphics now with SyncTERM. I'm not sure exactly where it is going but I'll enjoy the ride.. :)

    --- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
    * Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (21:4/106)
  • From Alterego@21:2/116 to HusTler on Friday, September 06, 2019 11:07:04
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: HusTler to Digital Man on Thu Sep 05 2019 06:37 pm

    Is that going to be a users choice in Synchronet? Or will it be
    Autodetected? When I first got back into BBSing I found some boards even asked to chose between UTF-8 or CP437? So now the user needs to know
    if they are using UTF or CP437 with ANSI or without? I also see some new
    graphic Demo on Vert.(Very Cool) Where is BBSing going with all this? Inquisitive minds want to know. ;-)

    So I use Synchronet - and I use it more with iTerm (a MAC terminal program) instead of SyncTerm.

    I like iterm, because it is what I use connecting to my linux servers to do any
    admin work - and I change nothing to connect to Synchronet to interact on the BBS. It also gives me bigger screen realestate, so I can read a longer message withouth paging as much. Overall, I think it is awesome that I can use either terminal without any profile/setting changes.

    There are a few hickups that I'm, but mostly it works transparently.
    ...ëîåã

    ... Monday is a hard way to spend one-seventh of your life.
    --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Alterant | An SBBS in Docker on Pi! (21:2/116)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to ryan on Thursday, September 05, 2019 21:49:45
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: ryan to Digital Man on Thu Sep 05 2019 04:36 am

    Ah. Well Synchronet's internal message re-flow (line/word-wrap) logic does handle re-flowing of quote lines just fine, so it is possible that's an issue for systems that can't do that. Unfortunately, in a world where not everyone is using exactly an 80 column terminals (some fewere, some more), it is best to not make assumptions and just use longe-line-paragraphs and let the viewer handle the display to the user based on the display environment at the time.

    Yep, sounds like this is the core of the issue - there really aren't any BBS softwares out there as modern and/or feature rich as Synchronet. In fact I don't know of any other which appear dos-based and are popular in the same type of use case.

    Just because you don't know of them doesn't mean they don't exist. I'm pretty sure the ancient Fido/Opus style boards used long-line paragraphs. Which explains why it was defined as the fidonet standard.

    NB, door games assume 80 column terminals.

    "NB"? I used to run WWIV doors long ago that supported both 40 and 80 column clients.

    We do have options to change the behavior of quoted text, but I have have me system/editor set to maximize the use of wide terminals while displaying nicely in 40-column (e.g. C64) terminals as well. If I just forced all quoted to wrap assuming a 79/80 column terminal (which is an option), the results are not nearly as universally flexible.

    On the one hand I agree and admire the flexibility but on the other hand I have to emphasize how no other software (particularly legacy ones which happen to be popular in this hobby) think in those terms. Really much of the BBS world assumes a fixed 80x25ish terminal.

    That's probably true and Synchronet sysops are free to configure their systems with those constraints/assumptions.

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #43:
    Synchronet added Baja/PCMS support with v2.00a (1994).
    Norco, CA WX: 78.8øF, 54.0% humidity, 0 mph S wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs
    --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)
  • From Digital Man@21:1/183 to HusTler on Thursday, September 05, 2019 21:54:06
    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: HusTler to Digital Man on Thu Sep 05 2019 06:37 pm

    Re: Re: Mystic QWK vs FTN
    By: Digital Man to ryan on Wed Sep 04 2019 06:18 pm

    Ah. Well Synchronet's internal message re-flow (line/word-wrap) logic does handle re-flowing of quote lines just fine, so it is possible that's an issue for systems that can't do that. Unfortunately, in a world where not everyone is
    assuming a 79/80 column terminal (which is an option), the results are not nearly as universally flexible.

    Maybe this is off topic but I'm wondering why the push for UTF-8 compatability?

    UTF-8 really has nothing to do with the long-line subject.

    But support UTF-8? Because it's better, for tons of reasons: https://utf8everywhere.org

    Is that going to be a users choice in Synchronet? Or will it be Autodetected?

    It already is, in the current development builds (v3.17c).

    When I first got back into BBSing I found some boards even
    asked to chose between UTF-8 or CP437? So now the user needs to know if they are using UTF or CP437 with ANSI or without? I also see some new graphic Demo on Vert.(Very Cool) Where is BBSing going with all this? Inquisitive minds want to know. ;-)

    The XBimages on vert are not all that new now, but I'm glad you think they're cool: http://wiki.synchro.net/ref:xbin

    I think what Deuce has done with sixel (supported in SyncTERM 1.1b) is much nicer. You can see those demos on nix.synchro.net

    digital man

    Synchronet "Real Fact" #10:
    The name "DOVE-Net" was suggested by King Drafus (sysop of The Beast's Domain). Norco, CA WX: 78.8øF, 53.0% humidity, 2 mph SSE wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs --- SBBSecho 3.09-Linux
    * Origin: Vertrauen - [vert/cvs/bbs].synchro.net (21:1/183)