- From: Daniel Stenberg <daniel@haxx.se>
- Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 22:50:20 +0100 (CET)
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
- cc: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>, Patrick McManus <pmcmanus@mozilla.com>, Peter Lepeska <bizzbyster@gmail.com>, HTTP Working Group <ietf-http-wg@w3.org>
On Fri, 13 Dec 2013, James M Snell wrote: > My take away from your response is that, so far, the only benefit HTTP/2 > will have to offer RESTful API developers is improved performance in some > scenarios and fewer bits sent over the wire on average. What about the convenience of running only HTTP/2 on your server and not have to manage legacy HTTP as well? I'd call that a benefit. Or possitive side- effect. And I think better performance for your use case is a reason enough to use a protocol, even if that's not a browser. > My question is: is that going to be enough to warrant broad adoption among > that group of developers? I'm absolutely convinced that none of us here can KNOW the answer to that. With a solid protocol spec there will be HTTP/2 implementations written. If they are good enough and there are perceived benefits in using them, then the developers will use them. I have such users in the curl community. I want to and plan to offer this ability to them. -- / daniel.haxx.se
Received on Friday, 13 December 2013 21:50:52 UTC