Use dependency of `itchat` instead of a source hard fork

[huan]

If there are any improvements, we should feedback to the upper stream to keep the community and ecosystem as healthy as they can.

My suggestion would be that we should switch to use the dependency of itchat before we release this project officially.

Related discussion:

• 基于 Itchat 为 Python Wechaty 实现社区首个 Python 语言的本地 Puppet summer#75 (comment)

[lyleshaw]

Compared to independent itchat, I prefer to refactor a web/UOS protocol code directly, although the last one may take more times, refactoring is a better options due to the age of the itchat code and some problems.

How do you think about it? @huan

[huan]

My suggestion would be:

1. The best practice is adding dependence to itchat and send back Pull Requests to it for improvements.
2. A fork of ItChat is acceptable because that would be easy to be sync with the upstream repo
3. "refactor a web/UOS protocol code directly" is acceptable, but I do not think it's the best practice for our current name wechaty-puppet-itchat. If we decide to do that, I'd like to suggest renaming our module to another name that does not include the itchat because we are not depending on it. (for example, rename our module to wechaty-puppet-uos)
4. If we select the above option 3, then we should credit the ItChat in the copy/pasted source code.