msn-pecan 0.1 good enough?

[Jordan]

On Sunday, March 21, 2010, Stephen Holt <stephen.holt at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Stephen Holt: that "feature regressions" argument sounds like FUD;
> it's something that people say, but it's not really true.
>
>
> So, just to be clear, there is nothing the current MSN prpl in libpurple can do that msn-pecan cannot in it's current state?
>

I haven't been keeping up with the states of the two implementations,
however I think Stephen is remembering when we switched from Pecan to
the stock prpl. At that time the prpl in Libpurple was at P15 and
Pecan was at P13. The key difference was that Pecan did not yet fully
support offline messages while the Libpurple prpl did.

My understanding is that not only does Pecan now have offline
messages, but it now supports more features than the stock prpl, such
as receipt of handwritten messages. Is this accurate Filipe?

Jordan

-- 

Jordan