On Wed, Jan 20, 2021 at 11:42 PM Miguel de Luis Espinosa < enteka at fastmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021, at 5:28 AM, Mansfield wrote: > > This time it's a short question that I can't find an answer to. > > > > Why not use '.gem' as the file extension? Why the encouragement to > > support one or both of gmi / gemini instead of adding a new one? > > > > What I was able to find was, "Current Gemini servers seem to use .gmi > > or .gemini extensions for this purpose, and new servers are strongly > > encouraged to support one or both of these options instead of adding a > > new one to the mix." (from > > gemini.circumlunar.space/docs/best-practices.gmi) > > > > To be clear: You won't get any argument from me. The only thing swaying > > me either way is, to me, '.gem' feels cooler. I'd *really* love to use > > that... I'd feel... almost sad to use gmi... and gemini is annoyingly > > long. So. No logical argument here. Just looking for some background > > and trying to get a feel for how horrible a person I'd be if I went > > with gem. > > > > Thoughts? > > .gem is for Ruby gem files (sort of libraries) > Ah. Humm... unfortunate. Thanks! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.orbitalfox.eu/archives/gemini/attachments/20210124/de25 698e/attachment.htm>
---
Previous in thread (4 of 9): 🗣️ Jason McBrayer (jmcbray (a) carcosa.net)
Next in thread (6 of 9): 🗣️ Mansfield (mansfield (a) ondollo.com)