Hi Marco,
First of all, I'm an old ( 51 ) electronic engineer, that means, many times we have a different point of view or our "brain" work different from software word; also I'm not a native English specking people, my apologies by that.
We use BB since many years because BB is strong and stable; We switch from Oberon/F to BB1.x...to BB1.5 used to write our tools today running into a slow and stable lane.
Into this scenery I'm very "confuse" with this release, this is a spin-off BlackBox personal release and incompatible with BB1.x released by OMS, is this correct ?
In this case; is "BlackBox 2.0" a "happy" name ?
Walter
----- Original Message -----
From: Marco Ciot <mailto:marco{([at]})nowhere.xy
To: BlackBox Mailing List <mailto:blackbox{([at]})nowhere.xy
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2007 9:03 PM
Subject: [BlackBox] - BlackBox 2.0 (BrancoBox)
Hi everybody!
It's late night here in Switzerland, the home of BlackBox...
And it's time, that I let everybody here know, that I just committed the following site:
http://blackbox.ciot.org
(When typing BlackBox before in the HTML Source I mistyped it as BlacoBox and hardly noticed it. Had then just the association with branco meaning white in Portuguese. So Open Source and BrancoBox have quite some association potential... ;)
Please download BlackBox 2.0 beta 0.8 and use it! (FYI: beta applies to the documentation, the system is productional and highly reliable.)
The Open Source Project needs to take off and this release brings the required fundamentals.
(E.g. the hierarchic file system allows to simplify the distribution of modules according to their dependencies. This applies to the tons of extensions in CPC ZinnAmTurm as well as to the system core.)
Best regards and looking forward to your feed back
Marco
Received on Fri Jun 01 2007 - 16:02:15 UTC