[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software

Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

Ruby and Lunar Linux

Hal E. Fulton

10/22/2003 9:57:00 PM

OK, now that Chuck Meade has weighed in, let me speak
a little more plainly. (BTW, if you are reading the
mailing list, you may not see his reply, which was to
the newsgroup. Mirroring is currently broken, I think.)

I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
Andrew W and others.

But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.

I've been a Lunar enthusiast for several months now.
It's very fast and very stable, definitely a hacker's
platform.

The current app management system is in bash, but there
is talk of porting it to Ruby. Needless to say, I'm very
much in favor of that. Some porting work has already been
done by me and a couple of other developers.

Of course, in the process of porting, a lot of enhancement
will be done. You always learn from the first time. (One
of my friends once told me, "The way to write the best
possible system is: Write it once, throw it away, write it
again." There's some truth in that.)

So, any interested Rubyists can go to http://lunar...
for more information.

I have a feeling we'll be needing you.


Cheers,
Hal Fulton


5 Answers

Chuck Mead

10/22/2003 10:09:00 PM

0

Hal Fulton wrote:
> OK, now that Chuck Meade has weighed in, let me speak
> a little more plainly. (BTW, if you are reading the
> mailing list, you may not see his reply, which was to
> the newsgroup. Mirroring is currently broken, I think.)
>
> I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
> Andrew W and others.
>
> But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.
>
> I've been a Lunar enthusiast for several months now.
> It's very fast and very stable, definitely a hacker's
> platform.
>
> The current app management system is in bash, but there
> is talk of porting it to Ruby. Needless to say, I'm very
> much in favor of that. Some porting work has already been
> done by me and a couple of other developers.
>
> Of course, in the process of porting, a lot of enhancement
> will be done. You always learn from the first time. (One
> of my friends once told me, "The way to write the best
> possible system is: Write it once, throw it away, write it
> again." There's some truth in that.)
>
> So, any interested Rubyists can go to http://lunar...
> for more information.
>
> I have a feeling we'll be needing you.

Thanx Hal!


--
csm
Lunar Project Leader
Disclaimer: "I am not a curmudgeon! No... really..."
Addendum: "Bwahahaha! Fire up the orbital mind-control lasers!"

Andrew Walrond

10/22/2003 10:24:00 PM

0

On Wednesday 22 Oct 2003 10:57 pm, Hal Fulton wrote:
> OK, now that Chuck Meade has weighed in, let me speak
> a little more plainly. (BTW, if you are reading the
> mailing list, you may not see his reply, which was to
> the newsgroup. Mirroring is currently broken, I think.)

Indeed it is. A quick look using google groups show messages I have not
received fromm the ML. I'll reply to the those from there.
>
> I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
> Andrew W and others.
>
> But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.
>

Sorry! Didn't mean to hijack the thread :(

> I've been a Lunar enthusiast for several months now.
> It's very fast and very stable, definitely a hacker's
> platform.
>
> The current app management system is in bash, but there
> is talk of porting it to Ruby. Needless to say, I'm very
> much in favor of that. Some porting work has already been
> done by me and a couple of other developers.

Rubyx was written in bash in the beginning, and called FTL. It's been ruby
based for quite a while now (I used it as an exercise to learn ruby
actually...)
>
> Of course, in the process of porting, a lot of enhancement
> will be done. You always learn from the first time. (One
> of my friends once told me, "The way to write the best
> possible system is: Write it once, throw it away, write it
> again." There's some truth in that.)
>

Amen. :)

> So, any interested Rubyists can go to http://lunar...
> for more information.
>
> I have a feeling we'll be needing you.

I'm off to take a look right now
>
>
> Cheers,
> Hal Fulton


Chuck Mead

10/22/2003 10:29:00 PM

0

Andrew Walrond wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 Oct 2003 10:57 pm, Hal Fulton wrote:
>
>>OK, now that Chuck Meade has weighed in, let me speak
>>a little more plainly. (BTW, if you are reading the
>>mailing list, you may not see his reply, which was to
>>the newsgroup. Mirroring is currently broken, I think.)
>
>
> Indeed it is. A quick look using google groups show messages I have not
> received fromm the ML. I'll reply to the those from there.
>
>>I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
>>Andrew W and others.
>>
>>But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.
>>
>
>
> Sorry! Didn't mean to hijack the thread :(
>
>
>>I've been a Lunar enthusiast for several months now.
>>It's very fast and very stable, definitely a hacker's
>>platform.
>>
>>The current app management system is in bash, but there
>>is talk of porting it to Ruby. Needless to say, I'm very
>>much in favor of that. Some porting work has already been
>>done by me and a couple of other developers.
>
>
> Rubyx was written in bash in the beginning, and called FTL. It's been ruby
> based for quite a while now (I used it as an exercise to learn ruby
> actually...)
>
>>Of course, in the process of porting, a lot of enhancement
>>will be done. You always learn from the first time. (One
>>of my friends once told me, "The way to write the best
>>possible system is: Write it once, throw it away, write it
>>again." There's some truth in that.)
>>
>
>
> Amen. :)
>
>
>>So, any interested Rubyists can go to http://lunar...
>>for more information.
>>
>>I have a feeling we'll be needing you.
>
>
> I'm off to take a look right now

Andrew,
If you have any direct questions we can be found in IRC on
freenode #lunar. Also at dbguin.lunar-linux.org:6667 #lunar-dev.

The Lunar community is global so there are people around most times of
the 24 hour clock.

--
csm
Lunar Project Leader
Disclaimer: "I am not a curmudgeon! No... really..."
Addendum: "Bwahahaha! Fire up the orbital mind-control lasers!"

Hal E. Fulton

10/22/2003 10:37:00 PM

0

Andrew Walrond wrote:
> On Wednesday 22 Oct 2003 10:57 pm, Hal Fulton wrote:

>>I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
>>Andrew W and others.
>>
>>But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.
>
> Sorry! Didn't mean to hijack the thread :(

No apology needed, you didn't hijack anything.

I remembered Rubyx and sent you email this last night...
think it bounced. Maybe I typed the addr wrong.

And Lunar has never been mentioned until recently as far
as I am aware.

In any event, you can contribute to Lunar if you wish,
and I'd encourage it. I'm not certain Lunar and Rubyx are
competing things just because they both use Ruby.

But I'm throwing my lot in with Lunar. I like it, and I
intend to apply a good deal of my energy to it.

Hal


ptkwt

10/23/2003 3:48:00 AM

0

In article <3F9705AD.7070908@hypermetrics.com>,
Hal Fulton <hal9000@hypermetrics.com> wrote:
>Andrew Walrond wrote:
>> On Wednesday 22 Oct 2003 10:57 pm, Hal Fulton wrote:
>
>>>I don't wish to detract from Rubyx or the efforts of
>>>Andrew W and others.
>>>
>>>But it was Lunar, not Rubyx, that I was talking about.
>>
>> Sorry! Didn't mean to hijack the thread :(
>
>No apology needed, you didn't hijack anything.
>
>I remembered Rubyx and sent you email this last night...
>think it bounced. Maybe I typed the addr wrong.
>
>And Lunar has never been mentioned until recently as far
>as I am aware.
>
>In any event, you can contribute to Lunar if you wish,
>and I'd encourage it. I'm not certain Lunar and Rubyx are
>competing things just because they both use Ruby.
>
>But I'm throwing my lot in with Lunar. I like it, and I
>intend to apply a good deal of my energy to it.
>

Well, if nothing else maybe Lunar could use Rubyx's Ruby-based init
system (which apparently is already working)... It's pretty much a
standalone subsystem so the more users the better. And it could save a
bit of effort.

Phil