On Jul 8, 4:45 pm, Chris Forsythe <[email protected]> wrote: > On Jul 8, 2011, at 10:32 AM, Peter Hosey <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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? > > I don't remember this either.
I'll see if I can find them but I didn't want for this to be a "well, he said, so I said" conversation; I just wanted to defend Snarl's position at the time as your comments didn't match my recollection. > > > > > > > > >> 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. > I think that was my point at the time: I couldn't (and still can't) see the point in it being visually readable when it's a machine-to- machine protocol. IMO excess message content is to be avoided - especially when encryption is involved as it (a) makes it visually unreadable anyway, (b) typically increases the length of a message and (c) usually can't be accelerated. It's academic I know, but the specification for SNP 3.0 is on our Wiki in case you're interested in reading it. > > -- > > 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 > > athttp://groups.google.com/group/growldiscuss?hl=en. -- 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.
