Hello Michael!

Jun 09 07:29 03, Michael Grant wrote to Bo Simonsen:

 BS>> After maximus is working well, you might see a development with 
 BS>> Squish.. But i won't (and wesley niether i guess) make a graphic user 
 BS>> interface, textfiles is more flexible.

 MG> You can make it output text based configs as usual, but the 
 MG> advantages of a GUI interface are ease of use, as it can be made to 
 MG> use global commands, which can save a user of the tosser a lot of 
 MG> mindless repetition work, especially if one has a large setup of 
 MG> echos. 

The Squish setup is quite simple, so we big is the need for a UI to do the setup?

 MG> By outputing the traditional SQUISH.CFG and ROUTE.CFG files, 
 MG> it would be backwards compatible, and would satisfy those who prefer 
 MG> to use the text configs. A GUI interface can do other things as well, 
 MG> like create a custom batch file to call the tosser, set message base 
 MG> limits, or check and repair damaged message bases.

Yes i see.. but if you're a programmer you could code it, and i guess wes
will include it in the source...

 BS>> And a fileticker... well for the Linux people there is only one 
 BS>> whitch still is beeing developed, and it's htick, but it require 3 
 BS>> extra liberies, and if you only would use it as a fileticker, it has a 
 BS>> big configuration...

 BS>> A shame i'm not good at pascal, else i would do some developing at
 BS>> Protick.

 MG> The ticker is an afterthought; not everyone needs one. I believe NEF 
 MG> is open source now as well, and it has some integration with the 
 MG> SMAPI.

Do you have a link with the sources?

 MG>>> I still feel that Squish is the most flexible and dependible tosser
 MG>>> out there. If updated to todays standards, it'd be hard to beat.

 BS>> hmm.. it satisfied about hpt.. but then we got sqafix ported to 
 BS>> Linux, i would maybe use Squish.

 MG> But not everyone is satisfied with hpt, and not everyone is solely 
 MG> interested in Linux development. You need to stop thinking in 
 MG> traditional Linux text-based config terms, that sort of thing turns a 
 MG> lot of potential users of a program off; that much certainly has been 
 MG> shown to be true with hpt.

Squish's setup has always been textbased, so why change it? I guess the
users has been very satisfied about it.

And there is nothing wrong with HPT, i used by the most mailhubs around.

But squish will be fine for a point/little node, because it doesn't require
mutch (config and diskplace).. 

 MG> I feel any decent development should be a multi-platform approach, as 
 MG> it allows the sysops freedom of choice. SQAFIX is an excellant 
 MG> program, if it could be integrated tightly with Squish in a GUI 
 MG> interface, it'd be even better.

The main case it's that the shit works? A GUI is not everything.. hm..
maybe if you ask microsoft it's..

Regards,
Bo

--- Msged/LNX 6.1.2