News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Gmail vs Pine.

Re:Gmail vs Pine by cptnred on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:03AM (#1301116)
How old is this article? It says April 2010 at the top, but most the comments are from 2005-2006.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gmail vs Pine by pierrefar on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @06:51AM (#1301229)
There is a Dublin Core meta data embedded in the HTML head:

<meta name="DC.Date" content="2010-04-17T21:45:00Z" />

No idea about its accuracy.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gmail vs Pine by abraham on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @07:32PM (#1303110)
"Tue, 01 Mar 2005"
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gmail vs Pine by njn on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:39AM (#1301163)
I think it's from 2005. The Gmail logo he uses still says 'beta', and he links to this blog entry from 2005: http://www.zeldman.com/daily/0405d.shtml
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gmail vs Pine by ErrantX on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @05:59AM (#1301183)
The last releases of Pine appear to be in '05 too.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Gmail vs Pine by bediger on Wednesday April 28, 2010 @08:42AM (#1301377)
Univ of Washington switched to an Apache License, and started calling it "alpine". Last release appears to have been in August 2008: http://www.washington.edu/alpine/changes.html
[ Parent | on HN ]