Re: Is linuxconsole.sf.net untouchable?

[Aivils <ai...@un...>]

On Thursday 14 April 2005 10:36, samar wrote:
> for what its worth, can I suggest Opal - like ruby short and sweet.

Opal is already very popular under linux

http://opal.sourceforge.net/
http://www.fi.muni.cz/~kas/opal/about.html
http://www-306.ibm.com/software/tivoli/partners/public.jsp?tab=connect&content=feature-opal-bps
https://wiki.freitagsrunde.org/Opal

> best regards
> samar
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Aivils" <ai...@un...>
> To: <zb...@fr...>
> Cc: "James Simmons" <jsi...@pe...>; 
> <lin...@li...>; <jsi...@in...>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 9:05 PM
> Subject: Re: Is linuxconsole.sf.net untouchable?
> 
> 
> > On Wednesday 13 April 2005 20:30, Zoltan Boszormenyi wrote:
> >> > I agree. Ruby should be placed into a attic. We need a new branch with 
> >> > a
> >> > new name i.e being a type of gem. Also people often got confused about 
> >> > the
> >> > name because there is a scripting language called ruby. Any suggesting
> >> > what the gem name we should us?
> >>
> >> Korund. That covers almost all. It also refers to how hard the thing is.
> >> And I find it a fancy name, too. :-)
> >
> > Oops. I was think that all is Holywood movie names :o)
> > However korundum is ruby-language submodule.
> >
> > To keep movie-gem compatibility i vote
> >
> > moonstone
> >
> > Learn more
> > http://www.gemhut.com/gemidx.htm
> >
> > Regards,
> > Aivils