sajoin/svsjoin

[Winbots]

Which is more powerful? sajoin or svsjoin? or are they the exact same?

[codemastr]

SVSJOIN does not say "you were forced to join #chan"

[AngryWolf]

SAJOIN was designed for Services Administrators (secure), and SVSJOIN for Services programs (needs much technical knowledge). For that reason, I suggest using SAJOIN, even if you can specify only one channel in a single SAJOIN command.

[Winbots]

ok, just wondering, because when i do this:
[10/2/2004 4:20:47 PM] * Cobi sets mode +i for #test
and use svsjoin, i get this:
[10/2/2004 4:21:00 PM] * You were removed from #test : Invite Only (+i)
but when i use sajoin i get this:
[10/2/2004 4:22:43 PM] *** You were forced to join #test
[10/2/2004 4:22:44 PM] * You join channel #test
just wondering why svsjoin doesnt override anything...

[aquanight]

Well, typically SVSJOIN is used for things like NickServ AJOIN lists. I honestly can't understand why the IRCd would validate services which are supposed to be trusted, but I guess it makes since. Imagine this:

Code: Select all

* Now talking in #blah
* SomeBot sets mode: +b *!*my@*.host.here
* You were kicked from #blah by SomeBot (banned:requested)
* Attempting to rejoin #blah...
* Unable to rejoin channel (address is banned)
-> *NickServ* AJOIN ADD #blah
-NickServ- #blah added to your AutoJoin.
-> *NickServ* AJOIN ENFORCE
-NickServ- Enforcing autojoin list - 1 channel(s) to join

At this point, realize that a user had control over this operation. Which is more correct to occur? Allow the join, or simply say again that they are banned from the channel? Unreal takes the latter, but services can choose to force the former by sending an INVITE first, or by using SAJOIN instead of SVSJOIN. Usually, services would only send INVITE if the banned user isn't in control over the operation. For example, a MassServ's MASSFJOIN could be done with a simple INVITE + SVSJOIN on all users for that channel. (Note: Auspice (ew) uses INVITE + SAJOIN! Double ewww.)