 | | Re: Some comments (long)
|
|
(...) <snip> Mark and John's messages this morning look like the beginnings of two separate developments for the RCX, both of which have the potential to satisfy the needs of many who are dissatisfied with the current firmware. Hopefully both ideas (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Some comments (long)
|
|
(...) My request to both groups is: don't go 'off-list' until you have a feature spec that was formed with feedback from the whole list. It would be a shame for you to finish development of a tool that no one else uses. -Wes (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Some more comments and suggestions.
|
|
(...) I concur with this opinion. I realize that the subject may be a bit prevalent right now but the alternative would be to develop a separate list for alternative firmware discussion, and I don't know how viable that would be. What follows is a (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Some more comments and suggestions.
|
|
(...) That's a good pseudo-question. It would actually be quite easy to set up a focused group/list for this, as has been done for legOS, NQC, and pbFORTH; the viability is only dependent on the interest in having more room to breathe. Anything (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Some more comments and suggestions.
|
|
Well, now that you mention it... lugnet.robotics.rcx.misc might be the best way to go. That seems to have the most consistency with existing groups. If that group's discussion splinters considerably, then new groups could be created in the l.r.r.* (...) (26 years ago, 6-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Request for new list
|
|
I request that the discussions of alternate firmware implementation details go into their own newsgroup now. Discussions about features can be crossposted to both lists. There were several requests recently to create a new group for newbies to (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | group lugnet.robotics.rcx created
|
|
[Crossposted to lugnet.robotics & lugnet.announce; followups set to lugnet.robotics & lugnet.robotics.rcx] All right -- better late than never... A new group lugnet.robotics.rcx has been created, and is there now for anyone wants to jump in and use (...) (26 years ago, 7-May-99, to lugnet.robotics, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Would-be hacker queries. / Re: Request for new list
|
|
Hi. Hope I can jump in here and ask where a newby who knows he's in the deep end in computer science discussions, - knows he's taking in water, coughing and spluttering but loving every minute of it - go to ask elementary questions like: What's a (...) (26 years ago, 8-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Would-be hacker queries. / Re: Request for new list
|
|
(...) I'm going out of town and have to run for the bus ayt any moment, so I'm afraid I don't get to answer your questions. But a quick comment to those who are contemplating what the New Environment should be: You see? Not everyone out there wants (...) (26 years ago, 8-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Would-be hacker queries. / Re: Request for new list
|
|
Valid questions, all of them. We do tend to remain in the upper ranks of CS on this list. I'll see if I can take a stab at defining some terms quickly and clearly. BTW, I wouldn't mind adding my knowledge of CS to a FAQ for newbies. Mindstorms will (...) (26 years ago, 9-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Would-be hacker queries. / Re: Request for new list
|
|
(...) I have never said that everyone wants or needs Java. I am quite certain that no single platform of any type will please all of the people all the time. As I have said repeatedly here, I think choosing Java minimizes the total work required to (...) (26 years ago, 10-May-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
