[tech] [spec] On extending gemini

Drew DeVault sir at cmpwn.com
Tue Feb 23 01:41:05 GMT 2021


There's no doubt that Gemini draws inspiration from Gopher, but that's
not the matter at hand. I'm not going to rebuke your sources because
this question is not disputed.

The real question is whether not Gemini is or has ever been a playground
for Gophers to innovate on their hot new ideas in, and it most certainly
is not. Solderpunk has gone on record many, many times as disfavoring
extensibility. While the specification was under development, sure, it
changed quite a lot, but it has not undergone any major changes for some
time now. With his stance on non-extensibility, the lack of major
changes in well over a year, alongside statements like this in the
spec's introduction:

> Although not finalised yet, further changes to the specification are
> likely to be relatively small. You can write code to this
> pseudo-specification and be confident that it probably won't become
> totally non-functional due to massive changes next week, but you are
> still urged to keep an eye on ongoing development of the protocol and
> make changes as required.

It's pretty reasonable to assume that Gemini has entered its end-game
and it's not open to further innovations or experiments. Stating that it
is or has been is the historical revisionism to which I am referring.
Gemini has been quite obviously approaching its "done" stages for well
over a year.

If you don't agree, go ask Solderpunk yourself. He doesn't seem to enjoy
talking to this community anymore, though, for reasons quite apparent to
me.


More information about the Gemini mailing list