Camille Roux wrote:

>> Nobody seems to have taken notice here but shoes is not a library of
>> any kind. Its more like a different ruby implementation. It comes with
>> its own ruby fork and cannot be installed as a gem or something.

> ho, I didn't know that. I understand why I had curiously to use 'shoes' 
> to launch my project! thanks

That's not the problem - lots of apps are true Ruby apps that you start with 
some other name. Some apps even freeze Ruby and its libraries into themselves.

The problem (which I learned about in this thread) is the custom fork of Ruby!
I am aware that if anyone could find a technical reason to fork Ruby, Doctor Why 
could. But still...