💾 Archived View for rawtext.club › ~sloum › geminilist › 007495.gmi captured on 2024-02-05 at 10:39:49. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-11-30)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
gemini at xj-ix.luxe gemini at xj-ix.luxe
Mon Nov 1 23:18:53 GMT 2021
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
On 10/31/21 21:30, Charles Iliya Krempeaux wrote:
For me I prefer to separate out the TLS part from the server part. So,
this implementation isn't an attempt to get rid of encryption, but
instead a way of dividing up the technology to make it easier to work with.
I was originally doing this in a Gemini Protocol Go implementation, and
calling the TLS-free version "naked Gemini". But when I started reading
the mailing list archive, and some of the gemlogs — still working
through them — and noticed Mercury was the same thing, I created Go
package hg.
i've interpreted mercury similarly, though it doesn't exactly match the thought experiment post that solderpunk made about it. i like this approach as well to be honest. my gemini server project has a similar approach and serves "mercury" or gemini sans tls on port 1958. i assume this isn't canonical by any means, but it amuses me.
good luck with your project!