From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre@floodgap.com>
Message-Id: <200704111249.l3BCnTEF014776@floodgap.com>
Subject: [gopher] Re: Mozilla bugs about Gopher, and a dangerous one
In-Reply-To: <evijud$35h$1@sea.gmane.org> from Stegozor at "Apr 11,
 7 02:22:37 pm"
To: gopher@complete.org
Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2007 05:49:28 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=351748
> (Remove UI for Gopher proxy settings)

Wow, this sucks. Everyone get on this and complain. It's the slippery
slope to removal. Thanks for pointing it out, and kudos to Aaron for
jumping on it also.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=194220
> (Bug 194220 -- [meta] gopher)

Voted.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=158888
> (implement better handling for gopher on non default ports)

Voted. I'm not even sure why they did this that way.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=83881
> (gopher: preference to shut off sorting)

Obviously the example is dead, but I thought this was fixed. It seems to
only affect XUL (I wouldn't notice since I use Camino).

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=273459
> (most gopher-*.gif images are unused)

Voted. This looks like a good solution to implement.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=202196
> (wrong protocol for host names containing "gopher")

I think I agree with the naysayers on this one. Although it would be nice
to just type in gopher.floodgap.com and not get helsinki's *web* server,
I think this is a case where the solution will be worse than the problem for
many users.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=326034
> (Gopher module shouldn't try to interpret text into URLs)

This is mine! Vote for it! Aaron's the only other communicator recently of
note.

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=284558
> (GOPHER protocol support needs improvement (Save as "binary"))
> Should this bug be reopened? I tried with .zip files at JumpJet, but I'm 
> not sure I did exactly what the bug report explains.

It's for sites that mistakenly offer itemtype 0 for what really should be
itemtype 9, just like someone offering a .zip file with MIME text/plain. I
think this should be fixed on the server and not the client.

> Feel free to correct my English ;)

I'm sure it's better than me speaking your native language (what is it,
anyway?).

Thanks very much for posting these. I've got the relevant ones on my
cc list now.

-- 
--------------------------------- personal: http://www.armory.com/~spectre/ ---
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser@floodgap.com
-- Cleanliness is next to impossible. -----------------------------------------