World: r3wp

my vote would be to not have the option to to do >> foreach item 
block [ pring item ] .. it would make a language more uniform , although 
a little less cool :)

I don't think it will be accepted.

it's just a "vote". I don't expect them to change the language

I vote nay.

and what is your reason for nay  :)

I like lit-word arguments - they are very useful. Uniformity is overrated.

Lit-word arguments allow you to use functions to fake the kind of 
stuff that other languages need syntax for.

In some ways, REBOL is more uniform than most languages (other than 
Lisp without macros or special forms).

How is this related to R2 releases?

yes, I agree that this makes rebol's ordinary functions look like 
other languages' syntax / special forms .. that's why I said it's 
cool and confusing :) .. I didn't notice this is only for releases 
.. I was replying to Endo

Yeah, we're trying to keep this group on topic. We haven't written 
a DevBase chat client for R2 yet, so the development discussions 
of R2 releases are often in this group. Some people don't like to 
use chat, even if not using it limits the extent to which they can 
participate in R2 development (they can't submit changes directly, 
for instance).

I wouldn't want to lose lit-words, but they do create issues at times.

moved to Core

If anybody has archived some historical versions of REBOL, I'd be 
grateful if you contact me by private message. Specifically, I'd 
be looking for 2.3.* for Linux x86 and 2.5.0 for Linux, but any version 
pre-2.3.0 would also be great.

I still have 2.3.0 for Win32 lying around, but the Linux versions 
seem to have vanished into bit nirvana :)

sparc ?

I think I have an old Solaris version around somewhere

Sure, if you have it handy :)

Especially if it is pre-2.3 :)

What year was 2.3 ?

I have Solaris versions with date stamps ( the date I copied them 
to the server ) of 2000, 2001, and 2003.  I think these versions 
were susceptible to creating zombie dns processes

http://rebolsolaris.s3.amazonaws.com/rebol-old
http://rebolsolaris.s3.amazonaws.com/rebol101
http://rebolsolaris.s3.amazonaws.com/rebolnew

Is it an idea to collect all the historic REBOL versions at one place? 
Like the Workbench Nostalgia:
http://www.gregdonner.org/workbench/

It is, it would be nice to collect ALL REBOL "everything" in one 
place somewhere....

Google?

No :)


We need a place, page, website, (i.e. the original purpose of REBOLCentral) 
where a new person can come, and in a really nice layout EVERYTHING 
REBOL is there.

It points a person to everything else.


The Library,  the blogs, the knoweldge of this place, a REBOL "ReadMeFirst.txt" 
if you will.

We need that for long time and there's still nothing. I wonder if 
anybody's interested in this project or if everybody's happy with 
the way it is. When yes (everybody's happy now), I can understand 
why the 'outsiders' describe us as "elitists".

I don't think it's possible to gather all the matter and usefull 
links  in one page.

Rebol.org, Rebol.net and Rebol.com are enough to connect with the 
rest, to my mind.

I want access to old R2 versions to be able to push back the version 
compatibility of R2/Forward.

Might have them already though - going to check my archives. A list 
of the old platform numbers would be nice too.

Brian: http://www.rebol.com/release-archive.htmlshould have all 
of the old platform numbers

Graham: thanks, will check those Solaris binaries out to see what 
versions they are.

And I think I know where to retrieve my old binaries. Should have 
Linux (4.2)  REBOL/Core 2.3.0 by tomorrow.

Thanks, Andreas. It looks like R2/Forward should support 2.5.0 if 
it can :)

Graham, thanks a lot! rebol-old is 2.3.0, rebolnew is 2.5.0 and rebol101 
is 2.5.5. all /core for solaris sparc (10.1)

Heh, very nice! All of those binaries run as-is on a Sun Fire T1000 
:)

Just shows how long I've been using rebol for cgi work!

Confirming, HTTPS should work (after doing a net-install call) on 
Core 2.7.7.4.2?

The docs state that it is in View/2.7.7

http://www.rebol.com/docs/ssl.html

So, View but not Core. Bummer.

There was an end-of-line problem in the SDK, when using HTTPS with 
a generic proxy. Packets were sent with just LF, where the definition 
(RFC 2616) say, CRLF should be used. It could be fixed in the SDK 
by editing prot-http.r. I haven't checked, if this is fixed in later 
versions (incl. View/2.7.7), so it's a potential problem.

Gregg, I'll check with Carl about whether there can be a Core with 
SSL in future R2 releases. Hopefully the difference in event model 
in View isn't integrated into the SSL code. Geomol, I'll put that 
on the list to check.

There's a rebcmd with ssl that is part of rebol/command of course 
... I was guessing Carl was keeping it that way.

Geomol, that issue is fixed.

Thanks Brian.

Found a random bug in 2.7.6 with AS-STRING...

http://rebol-power-mez.hg.sourceforge.net/hgweb/rebol-power-mez/rebol-power-mez/rev/beaac6a1fd12

If anybody can get Carl to contact me... maybe we can figure out 
what's happening. I don't seem to be able to reproduce this outside 
of that so far.

http://www.rebol.com/article/0466.html<- R2.7.8