Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list gopher);
 Wed, 07 Aug 2002 01:24:19 -0500 (EST)
Return-Path: <aangel@myrealbox.com>
Delivered-To: gopher@complete.org
Received: from smtp-send.myrealbox.com (smtp-send.myrealbox.com
 [192.108.102.143])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits))
	(Client CN "*.myrealbox.com", Issuer "Thawte Server CA" (not verified))
	by gesundheit.complete.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CD0062E45
	for <gopher@complete.org>; Wed,  7 Aug 2002 01:24:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from myrealbox.com aangel@smtp-send.myrealbox.com [24.171.111.62]
	by smtp-send.myrealbox.com with NetMail SMTP Agent $Revision:   3.11  $ on
 Novell NetWare
	via secured & encrypted transport (TLS);
	Wed, 07 Aug 2002 00:24:20 -0600
Message-ID: <3D50BCDD.10403@myrealbox.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2002 01:23:25 -0500
From: "Aaron J. Angel" <aangel@myrealbox.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.0.0) Gecko/20020710
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gopher@complete.org
Subject: [gopher] Re: Process question
References: <200208070540.WAA30788@stockholm.ptloma.edu>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.49.5.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-archive-position: 658
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
X-original-sender: aangel@myrealbox.com
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org
List-help: <mailto:ecartis@complete.org?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-software: Ecartis version 1.0.0
List-ID: Gopher <gopher.complete.org>
X-List-ID: Gopher <gopher.complete.org>
List-subscribe: <mailto:gopher-request@complete.org?Subject=subscribe>
List-owner: <mailto:jgoerzen@complete.org>
List-post: <mailto:gopher@complete.org>
List-archive: <http://www.complete.org/mailinglists/archives/>
X-list: gopher


> Since bucktooth is the originator of the gophermap 'standard' and since I'm
> the originator of bucktooth :-), I feel authoritative enough to say that
> your understanding squares with the present implementation.
> 
> Now, to be sure, the UMN-style gopher menus should work in the same fashion,
> however, if memory serves.

As far as the UMN handler goes, that's not quite accurate.  UMN-style 
gopher menus are contained in multiple files, and are merged with the 
dynamically generated menus, as opposed to bucktooth's all-or-nothing 
model, which is really why PyGopherd's inclusion of both methods is 
quite nifty.