I believe my previous reply was dropped by mailing list. On Sat, Nov 28, 2020 at 08:54:34PM +0100, Daniel Stenberg via curl-library wrote: > On Sat, 28 Nov 2020, daniel#haxx.se#v...@kaction.cc wrote: > > Why do you put that crap in your From: line that makes it look like to > people as if I am the author of your email? Your name and address surely has > nothing to do with daniel, haxx or se. Please stop that.
This is how I fight spam. And given that curl-library#cool.haxx.se#v...@kaction.cc is the email subscribed to list, this is the only email I can send thing from. I will take care to reply to list, not to you personally in future. > Don't compare with gopher. Nobody is proposing to add support for gopher in > 2020. You are proposing we add support for gemini right now. Gopher is in > many cases a bad example. Okay, I'll check HTTP documentation instead. > There's no exact list of requirements for accepting a new protocol into > curl, but let me say it like this: it doesn't help to leave out stuff. The > fact that you *can* leave out protocol details and still consider it "fine > enough" also maybe hints that this protocol isn't used enough for this to > matter, and if these details don't matter, maybe it is too early for curl to > consider it? > > What do other gemini clients do? Aren't redirects used by gemini servers? > Are there (more than three) public gemini servers deployed? Other clients do redirects: >>= diohsc gemini://tilde.pink/~kaction/dist . >>> gemini://tilde.pink/~kaction/dist . +-----[X509]------+ . |+ +.o oO | . |.B = + O o | . |+ * O X + . | . |.= & * o o | . |+oX = ^ | . |=* E | . |+. | . | . | . | | . +----[SHA256]-----+ . Expires 2021-02-06 . >>> gemini://tilde.pink/~kaction/dist/ Directory listing [1] /~kaction .. [2] flake-dhall/ flake-dhall/ Nov 22 2020 > Perhaps also: is it really important to merge support for this > protocol if it doesn't support the protocol basics yet? From my personal point of view -- yes. Because I do not recall using -L option for http(s) ever. But obliviously, I undersand your position that things should be merged only when everything works. > Everything is taken together and considered as a whole. When the amount of > bad signs pile up, they become a pile bad signs and those are not the piles > we want. > > If you're serious about this being a real protocol with a defined URI (RFC > 3986 defines URIs, not URLs, and yet your spec calls them URLs all the way) > syntax, then why haven't you registered the scheme? Never though about it. I am just a user, after all. But as you mentioned it, I started discussion on gemini list. I hope gemini author will agree to participate in registration process. > > > I tried (and it worked) to replace this check with > > SOCKET_READABLE(sockfd, -1) before read, but it looks like it would > > block concurrent transfers, so it is likely wrong too. Does if(SOCKET_READABLE(sockfd, 0) <= 0) return CURLE_OK; (which works) make sense? ------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe: https://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: https://curl.se/mail/etiquette.html