I am just posting this so people can have it.
http://pueblo.mozdev.org/source.html.
http://pueblo.mozdev.org/source.html.
Here is the link to the peublo source code.
Posted by Pharas on Mon 17 Feb 2003 07:11 AM — 11 posts, 42,073 views.
Actually, here is the most up-to-date and official release of the new pueblo's source code.
http://pueblo.sourceforge.net/pueblo/source.php
Enjoy the freedom!
http://pueblo.sourceforge.net/pueblo/source.php
Enjoy the freedom!
That's not 'official'. The 'official' Pueblo has been dead for.. quite awhile now, anyway.
Not that there's anything wrong with that version, but as far as I'm aware, the source was pretty much given out for anybody to do what they wanted with. So there is no 'official' Pueblo anymore, except for the oldoldold one. :)
Not that there's anything wrong with that version, but as far as I'm aware, the source was pretty much given out for anybody to do what they wanted with. So there is no 'official' Pueblo anymore, except for the oldoldold one. :)
Well, Pueblo/UE is now what's linked to on the old Chaco site, which is maintained by the former CEO, so it's a little bit official.
These messages about another version of the Pueblo client being released are a bit like Netscape advertising a new version of Netscape Navigator on the Microsoft web site (or vice-versa).
Nick, do you see yourself as Microsoft and Pueblo as Netscape? *grin*
Very amusing. ;)
Put it like this, it is like someone announcing the latest version of zMUD on this forum "in case anyone's interested".
Put it like this, it is like someone announcing the latest version of zMUD on this forum "in case anyone's interested".
Oh, I perfectly agree with you, I was just pulling your leg on that one since I thought the comparison was particularly amusing given the way you formulated your sentence. :-) But yes, it's a little, well, actually more than a little impolite to be advertising competitor products here. Discussing pros and cons I suppose is fair game, but to advertise seems quite a bit out of place.
Thought i'd add to the fact that pueblo is broke
in terms of handling fixed & proportional fonts.
And the guy gavin that is developing it tries
to blame it on the pennmush server code that
i'm using. When i've debugged all the output
I get which results its the client not the server.
I've repeatedly explained to him it's the client, &
he says to fix it'll break the other worlds.. I don't
believe that, pennmush worked with old pueblo & MUSHClient
isn't broke.
Oh & Nick if you see this, think it's possible to enhance
MUSHClient's pueblo capabilities? Like, possibly tables &
other things with it. Not to mention on logins, MUSHClient
duplicates the login screen for pennmush worlds. (Does the regular login screen & the pueblo login screen.. thus getting duplicate).
I've been looking into both the pueblo client & MUSHClient trying to find one that can better handle html to make a really nice puebloized worlds that can provide a partial clickable & graphical interface. And so far I've been coming up with shortcomings from both. :)
in terms of handling fixed & proportional fonts.
And the guy gavin that is developing it tries
to blame it on the pennmush server code that
i'm using. When i've debugged all the output
I get which results its the client not the server.
I've repeatedly explained to him it's the client, &
he says to fix it'll break the other worlds.. I don't
believe that, pennmush worked with old pueblo & MUSHClient
isn't broke.
Oh & Nick if you see this, think it's possible to enhance
MUSHClient's pueblo capabilities? Like, possibly tables &
other things with it. Not to mention on logins, MUSHClient
duplicates the login screen for pennmush worlds. (Does the regular login screen & the pueblo login screen.. thus getting duplicate).
I've been looking into both the pueblo client & MUSHClient trying to find one that can better handle html to make a really nice puebloized worlds that can provide a partial clickable & graphical interface. And so far I've been coming up with shortcomings from both. :)
No I don't plan to do tables and other HTML rendering.
I think the whole Pueblo thing is trying to turn a MUD client into a web browser, and probably not doing either particularly well.
MXP which MUSHclient also supports, and for which I offer hints about applying to servers on this site, seems to me to offer a good compromise. Hyperlinks, pop-up menus, extra colours etc.
Rendering things like tables means waiting for the whole table to arrive so you know how wide to make the columns, and then you have the issue (like you do with web browsers) of what to do if the client has too small a screen size to show all the columns etc.
As for the duplication, MUSHclient doesn't duplicate it, it shows what the server is sending. The server must be sending it twice.
I think the whole Pueblo thing is trying to turn a MUD client into a web browser, and probably not doing either particularly well.
MXP which MUSHclient also supports, and for which I offer hints about applying to servers on this site, seems to me to offer a good compromise. Hyperlinks, pop-up menus, extra colours etc.
Rendering things like tables means waiting for the whole table to arrive so you know how wide to make the columns, and then you have the issue (like you do with web browsers) of what to do if the client has too small a screen size to show all the columns etc.
As for the duplication, MUSHclient doesn't duplicate it, it shows what the server is sending. The server must be sending it twice.
Thought i'd add to the fact that pueblo is broke
in terms of handling fixed & proportional fonts.
And the guy gavin that is developing it tries
to blame it on the pennmush server code that
i'm using. When i've debugged all the output
I get which results its the client not the server.
I've repeatedly explained to him it's the client, &
he says to fix it'll break the other worlds.. I don't
believe that, pennmush worked with old pueblo & MUSHClient
isn't broke.
Oh & Nick if you see this, think it's possible to enhance
MUSHClient's pueblo capabilities? Like, possibly tables &
other things with it. Not to mention on logins, MUSHClient
duplicates the login screen for pennmush worlds. (Does the regular login screen & the pueblo login screen.. thus getting duplicate).
I've been looking into both the pueblo client & MUSHClient trying to find one that can better handle html to make a really nice puebloized worlds that can provide a partial clickable & graphical interface. And so far I've been coming up with shortcomings from both. :)
in terms of handling fixed & proportional fonts.
And the guy gavin that is developing it tries
to blame it on the pennmush server code that
i'm using. When i've debugged all the output
I get which results its the client not the server.
I've repeatedly explained to him it's the client, &
he says to fix it'll break the other worlds.. I don't
believe that, pennmush worked with old pueblo & MUSHClient
isn't broke.
Oh & Nick if you see this, think it's possible to enhance
MUSHClient's pueblo capabilities? Like, possibly tables &
other things with it. Not to mention on logins, MUSHClient
duplicates the login screen for pennmush worlds. (Does the regular login screen & the pueblo login screen.. thus getting duplicate).
I've been looking into both the pueblo client & MUSHClient trying to find one that can better handle html to make a really nice puebloized worlds that can provide a partial clickable & graphical interface. And so far I've been coming up with shortcomings from both. :)