I fail at replying to the list, now don't I?
--
#Terin Stock
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Terin Stock <terinjo...@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:44 PM
Subject: Re: [Fish-users] Announcing Open Beta for our fancy new fish fork
To: Axel Liljencrantz <liljencra...@gmail.com>
* These is a link at the top of the fishshell.com site to a beta for a new
> site. Following this link results in a 404. Is this something for the
> fishfish fork or an unrelated effort?
Unrelated effort to bring the development of fish to a centralized place,
and to update the site. My server crashed last week, and restoring
beta.fishshell.com as been a minor pain (it was the only RoR site on the
server)
I'll work on it this evening, it will probably replace the current
fishshell.com pages, as I think there's been more than enough warning that
the site was going to transition.
--
#Terin Stock
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 2:21 PM, Axel Liljencrantz
<liljencra...@gmail.com>wrote:
> Hi all.
>
> I'm Axel, the original fish creator. I've been mostly AWOL for nearly half
> a decade, including not replying to a few private emails about
> maintainership. Sorry about that. I think it's fair to say I've lost the
> moral rights of the fish project.
>
> I'd like to publically state that
>
> * I don't currently plan on returning to active fish development,
> * I'd love for the fish project to continue and
> * needless forking hurts projects.
>
> As such, making fishfish into the new fish sounds sane to me. Two
> motivated and talented main developers with shiny ideas sound like a
> fantastic thing for the fish project. Like most open source projects, fish
> scratched an itch for me, but I find the current version to be close enough
> to perfect *for me* that I don't feel the itch anymore. And sadly enough,
> I'm a better coder than maintainer, so low volume bug fixing and
> compatibility work was never something that I managed to get into the habit
> of doing. Hence my current lack of involvement with fish.
>
> I'm a bit out of the loop here, so I'm going to have to ask some basic
> questions:
>
> * Who, if anybody has been maintaining the non-fishfish fish codebase?
> * Does that person (if s/he exists) have any problem with making fishfish
> the default feature branch of fish?
> * These is a link at the top of the fishshell.com site to a beta for a
> new site. Following this link results in a 404. Is this something for the
> fishfish fork or an unrelated effort?
>
> I've downloaded and compiled fishfish, and here are some random,
> unstructured reactions and thoughts:
>
> * Completion suggestions are awesome. Great work!
> * Making them not actually autocomplete and force you to press right arrow
> to select a completion is absolutely positively 100 % the right choice.
> There are far too many system destroying commands that could be run by
> accident in a shell to do anything else.
> * I'd like the suggestions to by kind of subdued by default, as it's a bit
> hard to see what you're writing otherwise. Might I suggest you make it
> configurable using e.g. $fish_color_suggestion to fit in with the rest of
> the coloring?
> * Moving the completion stuff out of the main loop is definitely the right
> choice when we have completion suggestions. I would have either moved it to
> a separate process and communicated over a socket or used cooperative
> threading, but I guess there is a chance that simply means I'm very, very
> old.
> * To make these changes, you must have a really good understanding of the
> code base. Well done!
> * To whoever did it: Thanks for making the file descriptors close on exec
> using fcntl instead of manually closing them. I didn't know about CLOEXEC
> ten years ago when I wrote that code, and it's been one of my private
> shames ever since I found out, but I never got around to fixing it. I can
> breathe a bit easier.
> * On my machine, most key bindings seem to be broken. ^K does not kill, ^W
> does remove text, but it seems not to be added to the actual kill ring. No
> searching with up-arrow and down-arrow. Left arrow and right arrow do not
> move around in the CD history when used on an empty command line. The bind
> builtin implies that the bindings are still there, and the code to handle
> these these commands seem to still be there in input*.cpp, so I guess
> something is broken? (built from a tarball on Ubuntu 12.04)
> * configure does not check if doxygen is installed, which means the build
> will break kind of silently. This, I believe, is a bug you inherited from
> me! :-)
> * I'm not a big C++ fan, but I can see that basic_string and vector are
> much nicer than what's possible to implement in straight C. I wouldn't (and
> didn't) choose to use C++, but not really my choice to make anymore. Use
> the language you like.
> * The old fish source code uses tabs for indentation, a four space tab
> width and the ellemtel indentation style. The new code seems to use spaces
> instead of tabs. Nothing horribly wrong with changing indentation
> standards, but currently there is a mix, which I generally find annoying.
> * All source files have been renamed .c => .cpp, but the .h files are
> still named .h. At least my emacs considers .h to be C header files, so it
> will get indentation and syntax highlighting ever so slightly wrong if I
> don't override, which is annoying.
> * The repo at
> git://gitorious.org/~ridiculousfish/fish-shell/fishfish.git<http://gitorious.org/%7Eridiculousfish/fish-shell/fishfish.git>seems
> to be significantly older than the tarball on the website. Is there
> an actual public repo with the latest code available anywhere? If yes,
> sorry for the noise, if no, I urge you to move to a more open development
> model. Making awesome surprise release announcements is nice and seems to
> actually work pretty well for Apple, but doesn't really gel with the open
> source model.
> * Why do bug tracking on github and repo tracking on gitorious? I don't
> have an opinion on which one to use, and it's not my choice to make
> anymore, but I'd advise against using both at once.
> * Point of interest. I never ever wrote fish to be fast - there are metric
> tons of really obvious low hanging fruit, but I never saw the need because
> I never had any performance problems with fish, even when using NFS on my
> 300 MHz Pentium II with 256 MB of RAM. What parts of fish were running
> slowly and needed optimization?
>
> In conclusion: The fishfish beta has a really cool new feature that I
> approve of, one that obviously required some pretty huge amounts of
> infrastructure work to get up and running. Nicely done. As grouchy old men
> are liable to have, I have some comments questions and suggestions, but
> overall, I would personally be delighted if ridiculous fish becomes the
> one true fish.
>
> Thanks for all the fish,
>
> Axel
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Live Security Virtual Conference
> Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
> threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
> will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
> threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
> _______________________________________________
> Fish-users mailing list
> Fish-users@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Fish-users mailing list
Fish-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fish-users
