-
Poll: Which language for shell scripting?
There's a poll being run on the retrostep home page to gather info on the favourite scripting language of alternate shell users.
http://rs.obada.com/poll-which-script.html
Go cast your vote!
2002-05-24 20:56:16 UTC by obada
-
retrostep 0.0.5.11 released
Retrostep 0.0.5.11 has been released.
Retrostep 0.0.5.11 is a bug fix release.
Along with this release, some more information has be made available on the Retrostep home page, as well as actually giving it some touches that might make the pages more pleasing to the eyes, as well as make it easier to navigate.
Retrostep is available from the download page at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=44038&release_id=82034
The Retrostep home page is at http://rs.obada.com
2002-05-08 23:27:13 UTC by obada
-
retrostep 0.0.5.8
The Retrostep 0.0.5 series is available for download.
2002-04-16 09:01:52 UTC by obada
-
retrostep version 0.0.4.1 released
retrostep version 0.0.4.1 has been released.
Sreenshots should be available at http://rs.obada.com
Release notes and downloads are at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=44038&release_id=79733
2002-03-15 12:48:17 UTC by obada
-
rs bashing still alive...
shellfront.org is taking comments about rs.
You can go over there and bash rs some.
http://www.shellfront.org/comment.php?id=567
There's a lot of misunderstanding about rs and it could be that certain people seem to want to foster misunderstandings instead of understanding.
As for working together, if you read the liststep list archives, you should be able to conclude for yourself that it is lsdev that doesn't want to work with rs and not the other way arround.
I consider Messages comments there to be FUD. "Changing the story" is a story itself... Again the archives and the rs homepage are there for an account of things. Judge for yourself.
If you are wondoring why there's not been any defending of rs of of late, its for 2 reasons:
1) I'll leave that up to someone else who has read the code - there's lots of comments in there. Even if you don't understand C, the code tells a lot.
2) I think defending rs is a waste of time. Everytime I feel like responding to something, I try not to, but instead go code on retro to make it better - like working on the next release (0.0.2.0) which should be prettier and more functional, but also leaner, meaner and crash resistant.
Is rs an "interesting shell to watch?" Maybe, but it could probably be more interresting to be a part of...
Something interresting I think I should share is that unlike an lsdev who was only able to point out about 6 lines of trivial code that allegedly belonged to him and which he wanted removed from rs, I believe rs has the blessings of the person who I believe to be the most significant design and code contributor to litestep: fahim.
2002-02-28 14:56:48 UTC by obada
