Talk:HexChat

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Commonly vs. Sometimes[edit]

I was quite puzzled about this myself, but after asking the devs the official name is apperently X-Chat and not XChat, however the website says XChat and their internal documentation is never clear, sometimes one is used, sometimes it's the other.

While X-Chat is as i have been told XChat or xchat is a much more common way to refer to it, so i'm writing commonly here and not sometimes. --Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 17:35, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)

While I always spell it "X-Chat", you're absolutely correct about the spelling of "XChat" (though I've never seen it spelled "xchat", except maybe in lowercase filenames or similar). GPHemsley 04:29, 16 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"XChat" to "X-Chat" Move[edit]

Not that I object to it or anything, but I was just wondering who made th decision to do it. GPHemsley 08:21, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I took it upon myself to do so, although there was a brief but general concensus on IRC beforehand. As "X-Chat" is indeed the actual name, and is used as such in the article text itself, I didn't imagine there would be a problem. (Yes, it's commonly referred to as "xchat" conversationally; the same goes for "email"—it's a casual convention, but this is an encyclopedia.) Austin Hair 09:19, Jul 18, 2004 (UTC)
I'm almost three years late, but official website says XChat. Only unofficial builds (like Acqua) are called X-Chat. I think a redirect inversion should be taken in consideration. --Brownout (msg) 22:59, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I totally agree. But to be honnest, even zed (main developper) sometimes uses the X-Chat name (see Google).
Still remains that XChat is the most used form. I'd vote for a return to XChat. -- skiidoo 04:34, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't matter which form is used more, in an encyclopedic view, the important thing is which one is the official name. Like what's said before, email is used more than E-mail, but the official term is E-mail.Ufopedia (talk) 09:40, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unofficial build homepage[edit]

The homepage of the unofficial build of xchat seems to be down. Anyone got informations on this? --Conti|✉ 19:48, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

It should be known that silverex.(org|info) will go down periodically (if that's what you meant by unofficial – there are a number of sites offering xchat variants), but the host says it shouldn't usually last very long: minutes, not days. I think the machine is used for a multiple things and tends to attract the kind of attention that can knock it off once in a while. It's up now, though, and I call attention to it whenever I find it down (fwiw). — b0at 20:28, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
It's been pretty stable for a while; the above notice is probably obsolete. b0at 04:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Windows Builds (GPL) - Link down[edit]

The link X-Chat on Windows Build Lineup appears to be thoroughly down. If the article has a maintainer, s/he should check up on it and remove the link or replace it with something else.

The only existing arhive.org version of the page can be found here. -Mardus 03:08, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It works fine now. Twinxor t 04:06, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

License in the infobox[edit]

A bit misleading to say the Windows version is proprietary, no? It's GPL (besides the nagware portion, apparently) and it's allowed under the GPL to sell your software. Twinxor t 04:11, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it is allowed under the GPL to sell your software. However, it is not allowed under GPL to take GPL code that you did not create and relicense it. Especially under a more restrictive license (shareware, in this case). That is what the problem is, not the fact that the author is selling the software. --24.117.122.78 06:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you can charge under the gpl license:

4. Conveying Verbatim Copies.

You may convey verbatim copies of the Program's source code as you receive it, in any medium, provided that you conspicuously and appropriately publish on each copy an appropriate copyright notice; keep intact all notices stating that this License and any non-permissive terms added in accord with section 7 apply to the code; keep intact all notices of the absence of any warranty; and give all recipients a copy of this License along with the Program.

You may charge any price or no price for each copy that you convey, and you may offer support or warranty protection for a fee. --TheGeekLord 00:16, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Screen Shots[edit]

How about the next time the screen-shots get done have them displaying the official xchat channel (irc.freenode.net #xchat) Peachey88 03:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User-Box[edit]

Hate to deviate from more important issues, but I noticed that there was no X-Chat userbox. I decided to create one, but I think I'll need some help with it. What I have so far:

XThis User talks on IRC using X-Chat, not that horrible thing called mIRC.


And:


XThis User talks on IRC using X-Chat.


Could I have some feedback on these, and maybe some help correcting them? Thanks Dracion 13:10, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Woops i didn't know you were working on one so i made this:

This user uses XChat
for chatting on IRC.





{{User:Peachey88/userboxes/XChat}} I'm sure there are bugs or whatnot in it, so you find one or want to correct something feel free to edit it. Peachey88 12:29, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the screenshot done under KDE?[edit]

Despite being a huge fan of KDE, I feel this screenshot on this page should show XChat running under Gnome or Xfce as it is a GTK+ application and in the current screenshot it certainly looks uglier than it would under a GTK+ desktop environment. Anyone agree? Jackster (talk) 22:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I run fluxbox. Last time I was looking at a friend's Xfce, I didn't noticed Xchat was more beautiful, and I don't want to compile KDE/Xfce/GNOME just for the sake of testing, so I believe you. I just jump on the occasion to mention that I would rather see a screenshot showing #xchat instead of #freenode-social or any other channel. And even if the interface didn't changed that much, some changes occured since 2.8.0 so this definitively needs a new screenshot. -- skiidoo (talk) 10:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why you think the screenshot looks ugly, it looks perfectly fine to me here. I agree that many systems install a fancier theme by default these days, so if you think the screenshot should be redone with a better looking theme enabled, then do it. But this has nothing to do with KDE vs. Gnome vs. anything else. You can make GTK+ applications look any way you want in any environment, be it KDE or something else. 85.0.191.212 (talk) 15:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Windows version over other versions[edit]

The article makes it sounds like this IRC client is primarily for *nix systems, with a Windows port. But currently its Windows version is ahead of other versions, its development being more focused for the Windows version, while the new features getting ported into the other versions later. Ufopedia (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just edited the summary - hope that's more reasonable... Tr00st (talk) 13:05, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You took it too far in the other direction, possibly due to Ufopedia's description. XChat isn't primarily developed on Windows now, it is dual developed. While the Windows Version is normally ahead of the Source version, features are many times added to CVS first, and then added to a Windows binary release that increases from say 2.8.7a to 2.8.7b. Rarely is a feature "ported" from Windows to Source, there is a separate branch Zed uses for windows specific code which is integrated with the GPL source at compile time. Odd revision numbers are used for Official Windows binaries, and even numbers are used for source. It still is just as much a Nix application as it is Windows though. LifeIsPain (talk) 05:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, sorry for misunderstanding Tr00st (talk) 18:52, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Available Plugins[edit]

Regarding the following section: "(including at least C or C++, Perl, Python, Tcl, Ruby, Lua, CLISP, D, and DMDScript)". The CLISP plugin is from XChat 2.4 and hasn't been updated in a while (September 16, 2004), DMDScript was just before 2.6 (October 5, 2005), and I have been unable to locate a D plugin other than just the DMDScript. So the question becomes, how long should these be listed in the Plugin Various Languages? LifeIsPain (talk) 21:27, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Link cleanup[edit]

Just cleaned up the external links section, just giving reasons for what I got rid of:


Those removals seem to be getting a little excessive IMO. Most all of those links fall under WP:ELYES and I see no reason why they should be removed. The cleanup done by User:LifeIsPain [1] seemed to make a lot more sense. The irc:// protocol links for support channels in particular are commonly used in articles covering IRC topics and this makes sense given that modern web browsers make it easy to pass these links on to an IRC client. Properly formed (I plan to create and/or expand some templates to make this easier in the future) the irc:// links also provide a wikilink back to the network-specific IRC article which is part of what having a wiki is all about. As for dead projects, two years is nothing. If a library API hasn't changed enough to require an update and no one is adding new features, there is no reason to put out a new release. Tothwolf (talk) 20:49, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if I was too zealous, was merely trying to be bold and get the link list to a quality where the notice could be removed. Re: the IRC links, I was going from the "chat site" part of WP:ELNO, if they're generally used in IRC-related articles, then fair enough. Regarding xchat-gnome, fair enough, I've readded it. Re: the other links, I think there's no reason to include 4 links to the xchat site, and getting rid of the individual build links helps avoid the creep to becoming a link farm... In the end, if you feel they're unjustified, feel free to revert them. Tr00st (talk) 18:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If that is your criteria for link cleanup, xchat-aqua should be removed as well because it hasn't had an official release since 2006, however there have been source changes since then. xchat-gnome apparently is up to 0.26.1, although they switched from navi.cx 2 years ago, and apparently don't have a website with updated information. However the new svn listing[2] shows activity 3 weeks ago. I don't say this cause I like either xchat-gnome or xchat-aqua, but they are both notable derivative projects.
As to the other cleanup, I agree that information can be obtained elsewhere, which is why I removed the third party plugins list and included the /docs/ link which linked to most of them. The main site may be sufficient enough however, so I am not opposed to most of the drastic cleanup. LifeIsPain (talk) 23:30, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I'd think the Aqua links definitely should stay. X-Chat Aqua and XChat Aqua were merged and redirected to XChat. Tothwolf (talk) 00:34, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
See above... Tr00st (talk) 18:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File:X-chat.PNG Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:X-chat.PNG, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests February 2012
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:X-chat.PNG)

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 18:52, 1 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

X-Chat is dead, long live HexChat?[edit]

I think X-Chat is not being developed anymore, so a fork called HexChat has started to take over its role. I'm not sure if that should be mentioned in this article, or if a new one should be made. I don't really know what the HexChat article should contain at this point, considering this article isn't too big as it is. Thoughts? CodeCat (talk) 22:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The HexChat article is being considered for deletion, not sure if that means HexChat should be removed from the XChat page. Wardinary (talk) 14:34, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not to worry, XfD discussions only cover whole articles, not parts of articles. IMHO the likely best outcome is merge HexChat into X-Chat, since the codebase is a fork with little fundamental change. As time goes on, coverage of HexChat will improve, since it is being included in Linux distros. Eventually, when sourcing is sufficient, this article will "flip", changing name to HexChat, with X-chat material presented as history. It seems like a normal evolution for a software article, especially open-source software articles, as projects gradually morph. --Lexein (talk) 10:39, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, a single article is enough. When should we change the name from XChat to Hexchat? When the latter is well above at https://www.google.com/trends/explore#q=xchat,hexchat ? Any other metric idea is welcome :-) Syced (talk) 05:49, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

XChat is maintained[edit]

Who keeps saying it's unmaintained? That is incorrect. Thanks. --69.17.174.21 (talk) 02:08, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why is it incorrect? Do you have a source or even any evidence at all? If their website has no news and no releases for 3 years that counts as "dead" to me. CodeCat (talk) 03:26, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The other maintainer is contactable and still pushing code via svn. --69.17.174.21 (talk) 22:33, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
But there is no obvious public evidence. We can't cite the maintainer's email address as a source and say "email this person to verify X-chat is still active". We need some public source such as a web page (preferably one not affiliated with X-chat) that we can refer to and cite. CodeCat (talk) 22:45, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Check XChat's svn repo. --69.17.174.21 (talk) 02:26, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have the knowledge to judge that. And even if I did, it wouldn't be ok for me to use it as a source because not everyone reading this article could make a similar judgement. It would be what we call original research. CodeCat (talk) 02:54, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't require any special knowledge to view: http://sourceforge.net/p/xchat/svn/HEAD/tree/ Dan (talk) 00:10, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Dan is right. This should still be marked as maintained. --69.17.174.21 (talk) 16:06, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Internal development doesn't mean much if there is no public news or releases for four years. As far as the outside world goes, it's unmaintained, the repository is not a factor in that as it cannot be considered fully public. CodeCat (talk) 16:23, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Did anyone think this was funny?[edit]

I removed a gratuitous line with a sort of flippant summary. Did anyone get some laughs out of it? Click here for it. --Kaj Taj Mahal (talk) 15:52, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Make seprate Hexchat Article[edit]

This article is for the now-defunct Xchat. I recommend creating a separate wiki page for Hexchat. At the moment, the wiki page Hexchat redirects to the xchat page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chocolatechip65 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I definitely agree. Hexchat definitely has its own identity as a fork, especially as Xchat itself is more clearly dead with every passing day. CodeCat (talk) 12:52, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
XChat is not discontinued. Only the Windows port (called XChat-WDK) has been discontinued. XChat is still very popular, outside of Windows. Syced (talk) 03:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
XChat definitely is discontinued. The last commit to their SVN repository was on July 13th, 2013. That's more than 2 years ago. Most development efforts, including bug fixes for the Linux/Unix versions, has moved to Hexchat instead. Tynach (talk) 08:12, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
+1 to the ceparation, hexchat is starting to take a diferent direction than xchat either on what support and what plugin use, xchat is discontinued as last release was like 7 years ago and las svn commit was from like 3 years ago. ^^^190.163.30.5 (talk) 01:20, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
+1 HexChat redirecting to XChat makes this confusing. Besides, there's a current controversy regarding a "come-back" of XChat to debian as a separate package, more reason to have a different article.--Idetuxs (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on XChat. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Messy article[edit]

First problem is that troughout most of the article there is almost no mention of HexChat, but most of it mentions XChat. The worst part is the Licensing section as it's mostly about the old shareware XChat for Windows; this is quite misleading as people may think HexChat is the same, which it never was.

I'll mark the article for cleanup and then we'll see what can be done...

--Arny (talk) 13:51, 10 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:HexChat&oldid=1207497772"