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.