should the gem name and require be 'mapnik' instead of 'ruby_mapnik' ?

mapnik / Ruby-Mapnik

Ruby Bindings for Mapnik

MIT License

66 stars 13 forks source link

Closed springmeyer closed 12 years ago

springmeyer commented 13 years ago

seems like this would be cleaner - more conventional - thoughts?

beanieboi commented 12 years ago

i just find i awkward to name a ruby library ruby-foobar :)

dboze commented 12 years ago

elliotlaster commented 12 years ago

Updated the require to require 'mapnik' in 0.1.5