💾 Archived View for bbs.geminispace.org › u › Acidus › 18761 captured on 2024-08-31 at 15:54:02. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

⬅️ Previous capture (2024-08-19)

🚧 View Differences

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Comment by 🧇 Acidus

Re: "0.24.0 update of Gemini Protocol is breaking a bunch of..."

In: s/Gemini

FWIW, I emailed @solderpunk about this. I suspect this was just a mistake or typo to make the space optional. In the post:

gemini://geminiprotocol.net/news/2024_03_31.gmi

at the end it doesn't include any call outs that the 4x, 5x, or 6x responses would be changing.

🧇 Acidus [OP]

Jul 21 · 6 weeks ago

1 Later Comment

📻 solderpunk · Jul 24 at 15:41:

Thanks all for bringing this to my attention. I will probably make a news post about this issue on the coming weekend.

In the comment thread here I see multiple references to a "trailing slash" but it's not clear to me what that is. Was that supposed to be "trailing space", in reference to the old behaviour for empty <META>?

Original Post

🌒 s/Gemini

0.24.0 update of Gemini Protocol is breaking a bunch of libraries and tools — The 0.24.0 update to the Gemini spec from 16.1 changes the format of the header line in a way that is breaking clients like amfora, and tools such as gemget, anything based on gemini.go, SmolNetSharp, Gemini.Net, etc. The breaking change is that, now for 4x, 5x, and 6x responses, the space between the response code and meta field is optional, and only present if there is a meta field. In other words "51" is a valid...

💬 Acidus · 12 comments · Jul 20 · 6 weeks ago