Hello All!

Except for maybe some improvements to a couple of BBS programs
(Synchronet, Mystic..), and couple of nntp or fidonet "apps" for mobile devices in the recent years, has there been anything else new to fidonet technology?

BinkD as been around for atleast 20 years.
Jamnntp looks like the most recent contribution (2013?, but I spotted a listing in Jul 17, 2004 for jamnntpd-0.6)

Is this as good as it gets for 2019 and beyond?


../|ug

--- OpenXP 5.0.38
* Origin: /|ug's Point, Ont. CANADA (2:221/1.58)

On 26 May 2019, August Abolins said the following...

Is this as good as it gets for 2019 and beyond?

Well, I'm working on something that is different, but still FTN.

Its a background project for me, and I've been going a month or two now. When I've got something thats worthy of showing, I'll share.

But to your point, I think there is modernisation that can be done, yet still preserve the retro flow.

...deon

_--_|\ | Deon George
/ \ | Chinwag BBS - A BBS on a PI in Docker!
\_.__.*/ |
V | Coming from the 'burbs of Melbourne, Australia

--- Mystic BBS v1.12 A43 2019/02/23 (Raspberry Pi/32)
* Origin: Chinwag | MysticBBS in Docker! (3:633/509.1)

Is this as good as it gets for 2019 and beyond?

To people commenting about lack of change, I have only 1 reply ... "Why don't you yourself?"

\%/@rd

--- D'Bridge 3.99
* Origin: Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards (2:292/854)

Hello All!

Except for maybe some improvements to a couple of BBS programs
(Synchronet, Mystic..), and couple of nntp or fidonet "apps" for mobile devices in the recent years, has there been anything else new to fidonet technology?

Not in the underlying FTN technology, no.

BinkD as been around for atleast 20 years.

It is a staple today (the binkp protocol). It's all I use today when connecting
with other nodes.

Jamnntp looks like the most recent contribution (2013?, but I spotted a listing in Jul 17, 2004 for jamnntpd-0.6)

Is this as good as it gets for 2019 and beyond?

The sky is the limit. All the stuff we have today is there because somebody, or
a group of people did it. I see no reason not to carry on with what we have and
also what new ideas people bring in.

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Re: what's new lately?
By: Alan Ianson to August Abolins on Mon May 27 2019 12:37 pm

Hello All!

Except for maybe some improvements to a couple of BBS programs (Synchronet, Mystic..), and couple of nntp or fidonet "apps" for mobile devices in the recent years, has there been anything else new to fidonet technology?

Not in the underlying FTN technology, no.

BinkD as been around for atleast 20 years.

It is a staple today (the binkp protocol). It's all I use today when connecting with other nodes.

Jamnntp looks like the most recent contribution (2013?, but I spotted a listing in Jul 17, 2004 for jamnntpd-0.6)

Is this as good as it gets for 2019 and beyond?

The sky is the limit. All the stuff we have today is there because somebody, or a group of people did it. I see no reason not to carry on with what we have and also what new ideas people bring in.

I added networked voting support to Synchronet a couple of years ago (message up/down voting and polls), but only for QWK networking. I've been asked about adding support to SBBSecho (for FTNs) but without any other FTN software authors engaged, it wouldn't really be of any use. I inquried about any interest in FTSC_PUBLIC I think it was, and got no responses. So perhaps the active developers just didn't see the inquiry or there's just not any interest, at least in that particular feature. Or there are no other active FTN software developers (!). :-)

digital man

This Is Spinal Tap quote #36:
Bobbi Flekman: Money talks, and bullshit walks.
Norco, CA WX: 64.6°F, 53.0% humidity, 1 mph E wind, 0.01 inches rain/24hrs

I added networked voting support to Synchronet a couple of years ago (message up/down voting and polls), but only for QWK networking. I've been asked about adding support to SBBSecho (for FTNs) but without any other FTN software authors engaged, it wouldn't really be of any use. I inquried about any interest in FTSC_PUBLIC I think it was, and got no responses.

I remember reading your post in FTSC_PUBLIC. I wonder if you went ahead and implemented that in SBBSecho and published the details in the wiki if it would be implemented in other software?

I know that wiki.synchro.net is well know as a source of FTN and BBS info.

So perhaps the active developers just didn't see the inquiry or there's just not any interest at least in that particular feature. Or there are no other active FTN software developers (!). :-)

I think a lot of FTN/BBS developers worry about compatibility issues (a real concern) so might like the idea but worry about things like that.

If you could come up with a "standard" of some sort it might just catch on. :)

--- BBBS/Li6 v4.10 Toy-4
* Origin: The Rusty MailBox - Penticton, BC Canada (1:153/757)

Re: what's new lately?
By: Alan Ianson to Rob Swindell on Wed May 29 2019 02:21 am

I added networked voting support to Synchronet a couple of years ago (message up/down voting and polls), but only for QWK networking. I've been asked about adding support to SBBSecho (for FTNs) but without any other FTN software authors engaged, it wouldn't really be of any use. I inquried about any interest in FTSC_PUBLIC I think it was, and got no responses.

I remember reading your post in FTSC_PUBLIC.

Ah, good to know I'm getting out (on this channel too!).

I wonder if you went ahead and
implemented that in SBBSecho and published the details in the wiki if it would be implemented in other software?

It's possible, but I have plenty of other things to work on and without any engagement from other developers, I don't have a lot of motivation to re-implement a feature that already workes nicely over QWK networks.

I know that wiki.synchro.net is well know as a source of FTN and BBS info.

Cool. I try. :-)

So perhaps the active developers just didn't see the inquiry or there's just not any interest at least in that particular feature. Or there are no other active FTN software developers (!). :-)

I think a lot of FTN/BBS developers worry about compatibility issues (a real concern) so might like the idea but worry about things like that.

Oh, me too for sure. In general, I've found QWK to be more of an open-book for enhancements (than FTN) and there's certainly less drama/push-back in that space. For that reason, I usually focus my "innovations" in that area.

If you could come up with a "standard" of some sort it might just catch on. :)

You never know. Anyway, thanks for replying. :-)

digital man

Synchronet "Real Fact" #39:
Synchronet first supported Windows NT v6.x (a.k.a. Vista/Win7) w/v3.14a (2006). Norco, CA WX: 55.5°F, 81.0% humidity, 0 mph SSW wind, 0.00 inches rain/24hrs