Re: [REMINDER][RfC] Net_ICQ

Tomas V.V.Cox wrote:

IMHO, the "Lite" concept does not represent this case. Lite is something like "lightweight" not limited to 2 simple http functions. Name would be more HTTP_ICQ than Net_XX. No, i think this is a typical case of 'Lite' like it is intented.

You can implement the provided functions, if you have http access only - which is typical for a webserver. Every other function requires an own port and a special protocol - a lot of overhead and requirements if you want to check for an user state only. Having HTTP_ICQ and Net_ICQ results in confusion for a user. Or from the other side: it makes no sense to create Net_ICQ_Lite from Net_ICQ because this means only to remove some network wrapper functions, which saves nothing. PS: I waiting for you answer...