[gopher] Updated Gopher RFC

[zack mayson]

On 9 May 2012 07:08, Kim Holviala <kim at holviala.com> wrote:

> On 9.5.2012 8:53, Mateusz Viste wrote:
>
>  That's eactly what I was thinking about right now. I think such "m"
>> filetype is a quite good idea. When a client gets such file, it would
>> get the mime-type of the file in the first line of the answer, and
>> then the actual file.
>>
>> This would not break support of older gopher clients, because these
>> would simply not handle 'm' filetypes at all.
>>
>
> Except, it would break *all* existing clients, including Overbite. The
> server would happily send stuff out as "m" and client would just reject all
> of that info... when before the server would serve type "0" or such and the
> client would happily show them....
>
> Doing type "m", and I agree that it sounds like a good idea, would require
> that *everybody* would update *all* of their clients at the same time.
>
Exactly! And Lynx hasn't been updated since 2009, so I can hardly see the
developers jumping back on board just because of extension (gopher+ all
over again?).

On a semi-unrelated issue, is there any client that supports mbox files
(and hopefully, maildirs) other than gophernicus?...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/gopher-project/attachments/20120509/5b098086/attachment.html>