From: Cameron Kaiser <spectre@floodgap.com>
Message-Id: <200801251405.m0PE5Nnl011222@floodgap.com>
Subject: [gopher] Re: Strategy: end of Gopher in Mozilla
In-Reply-To: <2a1386f80801250553i266b4fcau90f765fbd5b34d92@mail.gmail.com>
 from Hugh Guiney at "Jan 25, 8 08:53:14 am"
To: gopher@complete.org
Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 06:05:23 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UNKNOWN-8BIT
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Errors-to: gopher-bounce@complete.org
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: gopher@complete.org

> Okay, so I'm not exactly current on these developments (last I heard this
> was still just a "bug" in the process of being "addressed") but am I corr=
ect
> in assuming that Gopher is out on only *official* Mozilla releases? If so,
> are [Moz-hosted] offshoots like SeaMonkey=97which is supposed to be less
> memory-intensive and more feature-rich out-of-the-box than Firefox anyway=
=97a
> viable option? It's a little obscure, but probably a lot less so than an
> entirely new client would be (not that I'm opposed to that idea, as it's a
> project I myself have wanted to undertake at some point in the future). I
> have no idea how the Moz dev community operates, but if it's a separate
> codebase/more niche-appreciative crowd, maybe Gopher support would fair
> better there.

It's totally out of Core, so any branch will lose it by default unless it's
added back in, including offshoots like SeaMonkey and Camino.

--=20
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com=
/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser@floodgap.c=
om
-- "I'd love to go out with you, but my tarantula is getting neutered." ---=
----