> On 07 Feb 2017, at 18:18, Jaruzel <jaruzel@jaruzel.com> wrote:
>
> In article <[🔎] 20170207221841.2b60d3cc@mindloop.net">20170207221841.2b60d3cc@mindloop.net>, driedfruit-pqpQE The offical Gopher+ client from UMN is so broken I had to detect it in the Gophernicus server code to make it work - dedicated code for just *one* client. If that's not "badly designed" I don't know what is.
> +7wlovk1uMJSBkQmQ@public.gmane.org says...
>> On Mon, 6 Feb 2017 14:40:00 +0200
>> Kim Holviala <kim@holviala.com> wrote:
>>
>>> 0About this project /about.txt gophernicus.org TLS:7070
>>>
>>> But I'm quite certain some clients completely break down when handed
>>> a menu like that.
>>
>> How about 7070:TLS, then? If they do something like atoi, without
>> any extra checks, could this work?
>>
>
> Wouldn't it be better to look at adding it as a Gopher+ extension?
> Gopher+ may be badly designed, but it is already a standard, and has been
> designed NOT to break classic Gopher only clients.
- Kim
_______________________________________________
Gopher-Project mailing list
Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ gopher-project
_______________________________________________ Gopher-Project mailing list Gopher-Project@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gopher-project