 | | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
How about rOS or rcxOS? I think it should support USB in next relase. Zhengrong (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) Just remember that Mindstorms and RCX are also trademarks. Jürgen (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) ROS is already reserved for my upcoming Router Operating System... Please, please don't choose that name (I have no TMs or anything, but it would be nice not to choose that). (...) /~\ Eddie C. Dost ASCII ribbon campaign \ / ecd@skynet.be (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) How about RobOS? /~\ Eddie C. Dost ASCII ribbon campaign \ / ecd@skynet.be against HTML mail X / \ (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
There are actually several other trademarks owned by The LEGO Group and some guidelines to using the LEGO trademark. They can be found in their Press Kit on their web site (URL) retract my earlier statement that we should ask for usage of the name (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
I'm rather familiar with those pages :) Really, legOS is basically Mindstorms specific. Porting it elsewhere would be basically not worthwhile. And trust me, Markus has asked about legOS. Honestly, if that article had never been written, this never (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
Luis, What is involved with being the "maintainer" of the project under SourceForge? Ed (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) Basically four things: 1) Getting a sourceforge account and having me designate the person a maintainer. 2) Using sourceforge CVS to maintain the canonical CVS tree for legOS; this is basically very typical CVS stuff- committing the incoming (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) For me, BrickNix is good. But it sounds very far away from legOS. I think I like robOS more. It looks and sounds like legOS. So my list is: 1 - robOS 2 - BrickNix I don't have a number 3 favorite. Did LEGO say anything about their feelings (...) (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) me, (...) written, (...) and/or (...) Well, even though it has a few Unix-ie functions, I don't really see it as a -nix. My personal favourite is NogOS (for Marcus), but BrickOS is good, too. ROSCO (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) You could also try BricxOS (in a similar fashion to BricxCC), which also happens to have RCX in it. Martin (23 years ago, 12-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
| |
| | Re: RFC: Creation of Version 0.2.6
|
|
(...) We asked our lawyers about this many months ago, when the whole issue first came up. It's okay with them if the name "legOS" is used in a "formerly known as" context. Just like what you describe, basically - to make sure people understand that (...) (23 years ago, 27-Feb-02, to lugnet.robotics.rcx.legos)
|
