On Jul 8, 2011, at 07:14:06, Chris @ fullphat wrote: > On Jul 7, 8:20 pm, Peter Hosey <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Jul 7, 2011, at 12:12:01, Neal Horman wrote: >> >>> Interesting that it is a GfW spec. >> >> GfW hosts it, but it was jointly developed between us and them, with >> developers of all the other notification systems of the time also present >> (they were welcome to pipe up but ended up not saying much). > > That's generally true but we (Snarl) had our own TCP-based protocol in place > at the time and were working on support for Growl's UDP implementation. We > proposed our implementation (SNP) and were quite strongly shouted down by the > Growl team, hence we retreated to a safe distance.
What? I searched my mail archive and couldn't find anything about SNP. When and where was this? > My personal take is that GNTP is still a rather bloated protocol, being based > around a mime format rather than something more current such as XML. My opinion at the time was that XML would have been more bloated, particularly for visually reading; I proposed using or emulating MIME so that it would be simpler, not more complex. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Growl Discuss" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en.
