13 Aug, 2010, donky wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Has anything solid come out of this? I used to occasionally visit the forums, and saw lots of discussion. But it seems to have come to a halt for now.
13 Aug, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
I believe the protocols are still under development, but the open discussions seem to have died off.
13 Aug, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
From what I gathered GMCP is finished, and MUDs can use IRE's poorly (imo) designed packages if they want out of the box GMCP functionality from zMUD and Mudlet.

No news about a standardized plain text MAP file format, but I think a much more generic standard could be created on MudBytes, opposed to people doing whatever IRE comes up with. Not to mention it's not sure if many MUDs want to share their world database.
13 Aug, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
I assume you mean CMUD rather than zMUD? CMUD will have built-in support for GMCP, as will Mudlet, and IRE and Aardwolf are implementing the protocol server-side. So I suspect it'll be the protocol of choice for most muds and clients.

I'm not sure that the map thing really effects me, but even if it did, I don't think coming up with a solution here would be very influencial on others. Whatever approach the big muds choose is what will be supported by the clients, and that's what everyone else will use.
13 Aug, 2010, quixadhal wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
I assume by "everyone else", you mean only those few people who are willing to put it into their publicly distributed drivers/mudlibs? I highly doubt very many people with an existing MUD will bother rewriting their entire network stack to add support for something that isn't in high demand by their players.
13 Aug, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
Poor choice of words, please allow me to rephrase:

"Whatever approach the big muds choose is what will be supported by the clients, and that's what everyone else most other server and client developers who choose to add support for an out-of-band protocol will use."

I've already started putting together a snippet for adding MDSP, and it'll be pretty codebase independent. Perhaps if I offer that with a simple MUSHclient GUI plugin (and a tt++ script if I can get someone to offer their expertise) it might start to look more appealing.
13 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
I think that, with open clients with rich plugin support like MUSHclient, there is less reason to bow to whatever the big MUDs/clients choose to use. You are in fact a demonstration of this exception yourself, KaVir, because you are using MSDP despite the biggies preferring ATCP2.
14 Aug, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
While on the MSDP subject, a second MUD server added MSDP support last week. http://www.elvenblade.ca/?p=251

Regarding a tt++ MSDP GUI script, I can create a MSDP version of the Aardwolf prompt bar script. http://tintin.sourceforge.net/download/s...
14 Aug, 2010, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
So off topic, but I can't help myself: Scandum, whats with the Hello Kitty picture? Don't get me wrong, I really like it!
It's just sort of funny. My wife has a Hello Kitty BOFA debit card on our joint account, so therefor, the only type of card I can get is
a Hello Kitty card, and its well, er, kind of embarrassing.
14 Aug, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum said:
While on the MSDP subject, a second MUD server added MSDP support last week. http://www.elvenblade.ca/?p=251

Nice! I've spoken to a few mud owners who expressed a mild interest - I doubt they'd go to the effort to implement it themselves, but they might be convinced to add a simple snippet. I'm planning to release my snippet as PD, so people shouldn't be discouraged by licencing conditions.

So far I've got it supporting TTYPE and NAWS - I've added the snippet to a copy of GW1 to test it, and it requires only a few simple changes to the mud. MSDP will rely more heavily on the mud, because of the variables, but I'm going to try and keep it as generic as possible.

I'm not sure if I should add any other protocols to it, or keep it simple. I've got commented sections showing where you would add support for MCCP, ATCP, ZMP and MSP, so perhaps that's enough. I'm also toying with the idea of adding an xterm 256 colour function - if muds got it "for free" with their protocol snippet they might be more tempted to use it.

Scandum said:
Regarding a tt++ MSDP GUI script, I can create a MSDP version of the Aardwolf prompt bar script. http://tintin.sourceforge.net/download/s...

Sounds good.
14 Aug, 2010, Mudder wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
JohnnyStarr said:
So off topic, but I can't help myself: Scandum, whats with the Hello Kitty picture? Don't get me wrong, I really like it!
It's just sort of funny. My wife has a Hello Kitty BOFA debit card on our joint account, so therefor, the only type of card I can get is
a Hello Kitty card, and its well, er, kind of embarrassing.

HA! So I work at a coffee shop whilst attending college. The cafe is in a hospital, so I get a wide variety of customers from a wider variety of backgrounds. It's a teaching hospital, so a lot of foreigners come. Anyway, there are about 7 dudes that come with a Hello Kitty credit card. 4 of them are Asian men, two of them European (not sure which country, possibly Italy or France)

Now I think one of them is YOU! :stare:

I was also wondering about your avatar too. Are you a girl? It always makes me wonder.
14 Aug, 2010, Kayle wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum's avatar arose from some ancient drama thread.
14 Aug, 2010, ATT_Turan wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
KaVir said:
I'm also toying with the idea of adding an xterm 256 colour function - if muds got it "for free" with their protocol snippet they might be more tempted to use it.


I'm a little surprised that it doesn't seem to be used more than it is - I used the snippet in the repository (which I believe is by Scandum) and didn't have a hard time or anything. The last time I looked, I recall finding somewhat poor support for it in terms of number of clients that can display all of the colors…perhaps that's a contributing factor?

I would be quite interested in reading through an MSDP snippet, I'm impressed with the GUI you're making for your game.
14 Aug, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
KaVir said:
So far I've got it supporting TTYPE and NAWS - I've added the snippet to a copy of GW1 to test it, and it requires only a few simple changes to the mud. MSDP will rely more heavily on the mud, because of the variables, but I'm going to try and keep it as generic as possible.

MTH supports TTYPE, NAWS, MCCP (with memory optimizations), MSSP, and NEW-ENVIRON, it also deals with broken packets and is PD, so feel free to mess with it.


Regarding my avatar, I figured to lighten the mood back when discussions tended to get a little grim at times. I like my avatar on TMS better.
15 Aug, 2010, KaVir wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum said:
MTH supports TTYPE, NAWS, MCCP (with memory optimizations), MSSP, and NEW-ENVIRON, it also deals with broken packets and is PD, so feel free to mess with it.

Oops…oh well. I'll just leave it with TTYPE and NAWS as examples, and focus on MSDP. I've tried to make my snippet easy to install and extend, so if people use it they should be able to merge it with your snippet.
15 Aug, 2010, Scandum wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
I might give merging them a try when you're finished.
16 Aug, 2010, Rudha wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
Hey guys.

Got a pingback on the MUD news about this discussion. We chose MSDP because it was the most straightforward and standardised really. Im not entirely sure why other muds use more complex protocols when a lot of it is unnecessary. But I don't mean to start a holy war or something saying that.

We'll be releasing our TELOPTs module back to the nakedmud community, though we'll probably have to rewrite large segments of it since it uses a lot of custom code - our mud is based on nakedmud but its been changed drastically. I say that as a backwards way of saying 'I dont know how much of the functionality we'll take the time to make independent of our own codebase'. But at the very least the handshakes and sending of the telopt data.

I'll probably have it CC-BY, which is to say that it'll require attribution but otherwise you can fold/spindle/mutilate it at will.

Just throwing that out there.

Can't make any promises about when this'll happen though - Chahiero and I both have pretty demanding day jobs, so we can never really stick to deadlines.

- Maya/Rudha
Producer, Elvenblade
http://www.elvenblade.ca
16 Aug, 2010, donky wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
Rudha said:
I'll probably have it CC-BY, which is to say that it'll require attribution but otherwise you can fold/spindle/mutilate it at will.

I can't say for sure, but I seem to recall mention that the CC licenses are not really suitable for use with code.
16 Aug, 2010, Rudha wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
donky said:
Rudha said:
I'll probably have it CC-BY, which is to say that it'll require attribution but otherwise you can fold/spindle/mutilate it at will.

I can't say for sure, but I seem to recall mention that the CC licenses are not really suitable for use with code.


I am not a lawyer, so I cant say. Bottom line though, we'd want attribution, but beyond that do what you wish.
16 Aug, 2010, David Haley wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
You probably want to use a BSD or MIT style license, then. It basically says do what you want, as long as the copyright attribution is preserved. These are very common licenses for software for people who want to do what you said.
0.0/42