From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: by 10.213.7.146 with SMTP id d18cs163364ebd; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:26:18 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.86.156 with SMTP id s28mr658879qal.108.1263479177616; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:26:17 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [205.234.109.19]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id 7si1921622qwb.22.2010.01.14.06.26.17; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 06:26:17 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) client-ip=205.234.109.19; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org designates 205.234.109.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Received: from rubyforge.org (rubyforge.org [127.0.0.1]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D48031D788A4; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:26:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from entry.masanjin.net (masanjin.net [209.20.72.13]) by rubyforge.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C3D5C15B802E for ; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:22:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from w by entry.masanjin.net with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NVQaz-0001yN-KJ for sup-devel@rubyforge.org; Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:22:45 -0500 From: William Morgan To: sup-devel In-reply-to: <1263390213-sup-2608@changeling.local> References: <1263390213-sup-2608@changeling.local> Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 09:22:45 -0500 Message-Id: <1263478703-sup-3527@masanjin.net> User-Agent: Sup/git Subject: Re: [sup-devel] [PATCH] idle and unidle updates X-BeenThere: sup-devel@rubyforge.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list Reply-To: Sup developer discussion List-Id: Sup developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Errors-To: sup-devel-bounces@rubyforge.org Reformatted excerpts from Eric Sherman's message of 2010-01-13: > After talking it over with Rich Lane who suggested I check for idleness > near the unblocking_getch loop, it made sense to separate it out into its > own patch. Yes, I like this even better, with the same caveat as before about the config option. > * Is setting 'main' as the relay sender a problem? I don't think so. > * Is there anything more meaningful to send as the payload than the time of > the last keystroke? Probably not. Not a big deal either way. Are you going to send a second patch that makes use of these events to do the accumulation? -- William _______________________________________________ Sup-devel mailing list Sup-devel@rubyforge.org http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/sup-devel