Development of NetRexx

[FreeFall]

Hi,

So what is happening with NetRexx 'ownership'.   According to the  
RexxLA website, IBM announced an intention, in April 2008, to pass it  
to the RexxLA.   The RexxLA website tells us that they are in  
negotiation with IBM about this.   Any progress since then?   (There  
is an image issue here, so much of the NetRexx documentation is very  
old; someone surfing the net could quite easily receive the impression  
that NetRexx is defunct.)

Any work being done to propose a newer version of NetRexx?    Or to  
implement one that includes a file object (and ideally GUI objects)  
ahead of the game?

BTW Can anyone recommend a good program editor (and development  
environment if there is one) for NetRexx on OSX?   JEdit or LPEX  
perhaps?   Showing line numbers would be one convenient feature of  
course.

Can anyone recommend a guide to programming in NetRexx that goes  
further then Mike's and the Red Book, including Rexx2nrx, an editor,  
simple things that can hold people back eg how to find the Terminal  
application / Command Line on your platform, solutions to the most  
common NetRexx installation problems (building on Mike's User Guide),  
and current most useful java classes (without assuming any knowledge  
of java).

If not, if anyone has the time, such a Guide would be Really Useful.    
Using the format adopted for the Illustrating series by Donald Alcock  
(he wrote Illustrating C, ...Fortran, ...Pascal and ...Basic), would  
be fantastic.   Alternatively, using the same intention as the CMS  
Primer; telling you just enough about all the tangential systems in  
order to allow you to do what you are setting out to do, (in our case  
programming in NetRexx) even where the information is not specifically  
about NetRexx itself.   This would help remove obstacles to new people  
discovering the joys of NetRexx.

Connor.

On 27 Feb 2010, at 07:53, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:

>
> Many people have said they miss linein/charin etc. -- there's a good
> argument for making a RexxFile kind of object part of the 'standard
> runtime'.  Or even re-introducing/permitting static functions  
> perhaps, where
> if the programmer writes:
>
> x=foo(bar, 2, 3)
>
> this would be treated as:
>
> x=bar.foo(2, 3)
>
> Would need some thought.
>
>> Is there any chance that NetRexx will move further to rexxify
>> working with objects, eg by defining more rexx objects that
>> work seamlessly with each other?
>
> That's up to the new owners of NetRexx :-).
>
> Mike
>
> _______

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[rvjansen]

Hi Connor,

the open sourcing process is its final stages. I agree that there has been too much silence around NetRexx; part of this is because it just works, if one compares it for example to the jruby list, where much of the traffic concerns bugs and differences with MRI, we do not have that problem nor the luxury of speaking about those all the time. There have been some classpath issues on this list recently, but those are more platform problems (including java as a platform) than issues with the translator implementation.

The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that changed around Netrexx). For other publications we are dependent on outside authors. Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating 'buzz': there is not much to say about java integration and other things, because unless, other languages, this just works without having to add all kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say about 'how to do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X is done in java. There are no specific NetRexx external libraries - and I see that as a strength, because who wants to discuss the design of an SQL library when you can just do SQL over jdbc right now.

Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed functionality in the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely remember contributing some code to that. I'll look into the Donald Alcock series - I don't know the CMS primer (do know the TSO Rexx book though, and I like its approach), if you have a link that would be welcome. I think the work Chip recently put in to verify installation on a specific platform deserves inclusion in some publication soon.

best regards,

René.



On 27 feb 2010, at 14:56, Connor Birch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So what is happening with NetRexx 'ownership'.   According to the RexxLA website, IBM announced an intention, in April 2008, to pass it to the RexxLA.   The RexxLA website tells us that they are in negotiation with IBM about this.   Any progress since then?   (There is an image issue here, so much of the NetRexx documentation is very old; someone surfing the net could quite easily receive the impression that NetRexx is defunct.)
>
> Any work being done to propose a newer version of NetRexx?    Or to implement one that includes a file object (and ideally GUI objects) ahead of the game?
>
> BTW Can anyone recommend a good program editor (and development environment if there is one) for NetRexx on OSX?   JEdit or LPEX perhaps?   Showing line numbers would be one convenient feature of course.
>
> Can anyone recommend a guide to programming in NetRexx that goes further then Mike's and the Red Book, including Rexx2nrx, an editor, simple things that can hold people back eg how to find the Terminal application / Command Line on your platform, solutions to the most common NetRexx installation problems (building on Mike's User Guide), and current most useful java classes (without assuming any knowledge of java).
>
> If not, if anyone has the time, such a Guide would be Really Useful.   Using the format adopted for the Illustrating series by Donald Alcock (he wrote Illustrating C, ...Fortran, ...Pascal and ...Basic), would be fantastic.   Alternatively, using the same intention as the CMS Primer; telling you just enough about all the tangential systems in order to allow you to do what you are setting out to do, (in our case programming in NetRexx) even where the information is not specifically about NetRexx itself.   This would help remove obstacles to new people discovering the joys of NetRexx.
>
> Connor.
>
> On 27 Feb 2010, at 07:53, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
>
>>
>> Many people have said they miss linein/charin etc. -- there's a good
>> argument for making a RexxFile kind of object part of the 'standard
>> runtime'.  Or even re-introducing/permitting static functions perhaps, where
>> if the programmer writes:
>>
>> x=foo(bar, 2, 3)
>>
>> this would be treated as:
>>
>> x=bar.foo(2, 3)
>>
>> Would need some thought.
>>
>>> Is there any chance that NetRexx will move further to rexxify
>>> working with objects, eg by defining more rexx objects that
>>> work seamlessly with each other?
>>
>> That's up to the new owners of NetRexx :-).
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> _______
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Michael Dag]

Hi Rene,
I could certainly do with some good examples of 'how to do X with NetRexx',
for example with Java and VB
you have these nice IDE's ***1* that prompt you with functions and
interactive debugging,
with NetRexx I only have my UltraEdit editor which does not 'do' anything
for me to help me. I would love
to find out how in general one can take a java package like for example sax
and use it in NetRexx
*=(my java skills are simple too thin to Understand how it works that why I
use NetRexx!!!)*= ,
now I wrote my own XML parser... just because I don't know how the other
stuff works...

***1* is there a NetRexx IDE that helps me develop code and run interactive
debug so I can find out more then
      peeking and poking the dark???

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of René Jansen
Sent: zaterdag 27 februari 2010 15:53
To: IBM Netrexx
Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Development of NetRexx

Hi Connor,

the open sourcing process is its final stages. I agree that there has been
too much silence around NetRexx; part of this is because it just works, if
one compares it for example to the jruby list, where much of the traffic
concerns bugs and differences with MRI, we do not have that problem nor the
luxury of speaking about those all the time. There have been some classpath
issues on this list recently, but those are more platform problems
(including java as a platform) than issues with the translator
implementation.

The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are
only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that
changed around Netrexx). For other publications we are dependent on outside
authors. Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating
'buzz': there is not much to say about java integration and other things,
because unless, other languages, this just works without having to add all
kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say about 'how to
do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X is done in java.
There are no specific NetRexx external libraries - and I see that as a
strength, because who wants to discuss the design of an SQL library when you
can just do SQL over jdbc right now.

Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed functionality in
the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely remember contributing some
code to that. I'll look into the Donald Alcock series - I don't know the CMS
primer (do know the TSO Rexx book though, and I like its approach), if you
have a link that would be welcome. I think the work Chip recently put in to
verify installation on a specific platform deserves inclusion in some
publication soon.

best regards,

René.



On 27 feb 2010, at 14:56, Connor Birch wrote:

> Hi,
>
> So what is happening with NetRexx 'ownership'.   According to the RexxLA
website, IBM announced an intention, in April 2008, to pass it to the
RexxLA.   The RexxLA website tells us that they are in negotiation with IBM
about this.   Any progress since then?   (There is an image issue here, so
much of the NetRexx documentation is very old; someone surfing the net could
quite easily receive the impression that NetRexx is defunct.)
>
> Any work being done to propose a newer version of NetRexx?    Or to
implement one that includes a file object (and ideally GUI objects) ahead of
the game?
>
> BTW Can anyone recommend a good program editor (and development
environment if there is one) for NetRexx on OSX?   JEdit or LPEX perhaps?
Showing line numbers would be one convenient feature of course.
>
> Can anyone recommend a guide to programming in NetRexx that goes further
then Mike's and the Red Book, including Rexx2nrx, an editor, simple things
that can hold people back eg how to find the Terminal application / Command
Line on your platform, solutions to the most common NetRexx installation
problems (building on Mike's User Guide), and current most useful java
classes (without assuming any knowledge of java).
>
> If not, if anyone has the time, such a Guide would be Really Useful.
Using the format adopted for the Illustrating series by Donald Alcock (he
wrote Illustrating C, ...Fortran, ...Pascal and ...Basic), would be
fantastic.   Alternatively, using the same intention as the CMS Primer;
telling you just enough about all the tangential systems in order to allow
you to do what you are setting out to do, (in our case programming in
NetRexx) even where the information is not specifically about NetRexx
itself.   This would help remove obstacles to new people discovering the
joys of NetRexx.

>
> Connor.
>
> On 27 Feb 2010, at 07:53, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
>
>>
>> Many people have said they miss linein/charin etc. -- there's a good
>> argument for making a RexxFile kind of object part of the 'standard
>> runtime'.  Or even re-introducing/permitting static functions
>> perhaps, where if the programmer writes:
>>
>> x=foo(bar, 2, 3)
>>
>> this would be treated as:
>>
>> x=bar.foo(2, 3)
>>
>> Would need some thought.
>>
>>> Is there any chance that NetRexx will move further to rexxify
>>> working with objects, eg by defining more rexx objects that work
>>> seamlessly with each other?
>>
>> That's up to the new owners of NetRexx :-).
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> _______
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[FreeFall]

Hi all,

There have been some classpath issues on this list recently, but those are more platform problems (including java as a platform) than issues with the translator implementation.

It doesn't matter where the problem comes from.   For the person who receives it, it is just as painful.   Comprehensive documentation can take away this pain, and hence is something we should aim for.    Certainly can't think of a reason why we wouldn't want to.  :-)

The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that changed around Netrexx).

13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving documentation that is available for download?

For other publications we are dependent on outside authors.

Nothing stopping us from documenting everything that new and experienced NetRexx programmers need documenting, regardless of outside authors.

Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating 'buzz':

Perhaps we need a buzz of excitement about making what we have even better :-)   There is certainly scope (even if narrower than others). 

there is not much to say about java integration and other things, because unless, other languages, this just works without having to add all kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say about 'how to do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X is done in java. There are no specific NetRexx external libraries - and I see that as a strength, because who wants to discuss the design of an SQL library when you can just do SQL over jdbc right now.

That's why we are using NetRexx.

Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed functionality in the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely remember contributing some code to that.

Better to have this included in a new version of NetRexx, rather than as an add-on that someone has to find out about separately I would think.

I'll look into the Donald Alcock series -

They are excellent.   The author does not assume that the reader knows this or that, and hence explains every dot and comma, ensuring that the reader is fully enlightened.   A couple of special fonts are used, and the layout is part of the charm.

I don't know the CMS primer

When I first joined IBM (27 years ago), I had to learn how to use a multi-level mainframe operating system (VM & CP & CMS, + RACF, EXECIO etc), some programming languages, a sophisticated editor, communications etc.   Often something would not work, and since commands would pass though one system to another, I would be clueless in which 'subsystem' the problem lay.   The problems were mostly trivial and colleagues did not want to be continually pestered with trivial questions (or did not know the answer themselves).   After I had been through the pain, I discovered the book CMS Primer.   If I remember it correctly, it did not dwell on any particular system as the other manuals did, it told the user what was what, and what went where, giving the user enough of an introduction into everything on and around CMS, and how they fit together, to get them going.   If only I had had a copy of that book earlier.   Every system should have such a book.

I think the work Chip recently put in to verify installation on a specific platform deserves inclusion in some publication soon.

Yep, a group effort sounds most practical.    With the agreement of the authors and copyright holders, the various existing guides/tutorials could be combined into a single document.    As a new user, if I had proper softcopy of the Red Book, I would be happy to mark up the areas that I find unclear; allowing someone/somepeople with more experience to improve it.

Ideally, all the NetRexx user documentation should be combined into a single book, so once you have it, all your answerable questions are answered.   An additional book that a user does not know about is of no use to him.   Such a combined book could use wiki or other suitable technology to allow it to be improved by a host of people working collaboratively.    

Well, just a thought.  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[rvjansen]

Hi Michael,

yes, you are right, and I think I already often did mention that I use neither a lot. David Requena is your best hope; I do agree we need a working set of Eclipse & NetBeans modes; but it would be best to wait for the release of the translator to be able to use the NetRexx parser for the live parsing of these modes.

I appreciate the remark about 'how to do X' - I should not have drawn the conclusion that just because I only use the java class documentation no-one else needs this. I do count on you to deliver the chapter about 'How to do JMS over MQ using NetRexx' , for some reason.

Writing your own XML parser in NetRexx is not such a bad idea by the way - I've suffered SAX and DOM and lately, for small schemata I tend to always do a quick 'parse' in NetRexx.

best regards,

René.


On 27 feb 2010, at 16:39, Michael Dag wrote:

> Hi Rene,
> I could certainly do with some good examples of 'how to do X with NetRexx',
> for example with Java and VB
> you have these nice IDE's ***1* that prompt you with functions and
> interactive debugging,
> with NetRexx I only have my UltraEdit editor which does not 'do' anything
> for me to help me. I would love
> to find out how in general one can take a java package like for example sax
> and use it in NetRexx
> *=(my java skills are simple too thin to Understand how it works that why I
> use NetRexx!!!)*= ,
> now I wrote my own XML parser... just because I don't know how the other
> stuff works...
>
> ***1* is there a NetRexx IDE that helps me develop code and run interactive
> debug so I can find out more then
>      peeking and poking the dark???
>
> Michael
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of René Jansen
> Sent: zaterdag 27 februari 2010 15:53
> To: IBM Netrexx
> Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Development of NetRexx
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hi Connor & all,

   may I, from my side, say, that I already proposed to Rene Vincent
Jansen to add the Functions of my Rexx2Nrx
run time package (see www.Rexx2Nrx.com -- Run-Time) including the doc's
to the OPEN Source NetRexx project.

   I will publish open source my software anyway on my home-page when
I'm thru with my current tests.

But I *do underline* the suggested approach below to have only -one-,
-central- point of these efforts,
most probably Rene's www.NetRexx.org, only. :-)


Thomas Schneider

www.Rexx2Nrx.com
www.db-123.com
=======================================================================
Connor Birch schrieb:

> Hi all,
>
>> There have been some classpath issues on this list recently, but
>> those are more platform problems (including java as a platform) than
>> issues with the translator implementation.
>
> It doesn't matter where the problem comes from.   For the person who
> receives it, it is just as painful.   Comprehensive documentation can
> take away this pain, and hence is something we should aim for.  
>  Certainly can't think of a reason why we wouldn't want to.  :-)
>
>> The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these
>> are only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things
>> that changed around Netrexx).
>
> 13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting
> the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving documentation
> that is available for download?
>
>> For other publications we are dependent on outside authors.
>
> Nothing stopping us from documenting everything that new and
> experienced NetRexx programmers need documenting, regardless of
> outside authors.
>
>> Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating
>> 'buzz':
>
> Perhaps we need a buzz of excitement about making what we have even
> better :-)   There is certainly scope (even if narrower than others).
>
>> there is not much to say about java integration and other things,
>> because unless, other languages, this just works without having to
>> add all kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say
>> about 'how to do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X
>> is done in java. There are no specific NetRexx external libraries -
>> and I see that as a strength, because who wants to discuss the design
>> of an SQL library when you can just do SQL over jdbc right now.
>
> That's why we are using NetRexx.
>
>> Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed
>> functionality in the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely
>> remember contributing some code to that.
>
> Better to have this included in a new version of NetRexx, rather than
> as an add-on that someone has to find out about separately I would think.
>
>> I'll look into the Donald Alcock series -
>
> They are excellent.   The author does not assume that the reader knows
> this or that, and hence explains every dot and comma, ensuring that
> the reader is fully enlightened.   A couple of special fonts are used,
> and the layout is part of the charm.
>
>> I don't know the CMS primer
>
> When I first joined IBM (27 years ago), I had to learn how to use a
> multi-level mainframe operating system (VM & CP & CMS, + RACF, EXECIO
> etc), some programming languages, a sophisticated editor,
> communications etc.   Often something would not work, and since
> commands would pass though one system to another, I would be clueless
> in which 'subsystem' the problem lay.   The problems were mostly
> trivial and colleagues did not want to be continually pestered with
> trivial questions (or did not know the answer themselves).   After I
> had been through the pain, I discovered the book CMS Primer.   If I
> remember it correctly, it did not dwell on any particular system as
> the other manuals did, it told the user what was what, and what went
> where, giving the user enough of an introduction into everything on
> and around CMS, and how they fit together, to get them going.   If
> only I had had a copy of that book earlier.   Every system should have
> such a book.
>
>> I think the work Chip recently put in to verify installation on a
>> specific platform deserves inclusion in some publication soon.
>
> Yep, a group effort sounds most practical.    With the agreement of
> the authors and copyright holders, the various existing
> guides/tutorials could be combined into a single document.    As a new
> user, if I had proper softcopy of the Red Book, I would be happy to
> mark up the areas that I find unclear; allowing someone/somepeople
> with more experience to improve it.
>
> Ideally, all the NetRexx user documentation should be combined into a
> single book, so once you have it, all your answerable questions are
> answered.   An additional book that a user does not know about is of
> no use to him.   Such a combined book could use wiki or other suitable
> technology to allow it to be improved by a host of people working
> collaboratively.    
>
> Well, just a thought.  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hi Connor,

   after trying Ultra-Edit and recently Jedit again, at the current
minute, I would STRONGLY recommend Slava Pestov's
JEdit (see www.Jedit.org) withe the following Plugin's

    Satguru Srivastava's NetRexxJe
    Kermit Kisers NetRexxScript
    Davin Requenas NeTrexxDE

I also would suggest to include by Run-Time Package routines in the
standard NetRexxR.jar file, which
would allow the user not to have to bother with too may Jar's.

But it is up to REXXLA and Rene to make the decision.

I'm only suggesting that we should have some real news for the open
source release, so that
People recognize that NetRexx is an excellent, well accepted, and well
supported language.

Tom.
==================================================================

Connor Birch schrieb:

> Hi,
>
> So what is happening with NetRexx 'ownership'.   According to the
> RexxLA website, IBM announced an intention, in April 2008, to pass it
> to the RexxLA.   The RexxLA website tells us that they are in
> negotiation with IBM about this.   Any progress since then?   (There
> is an image issue here, so much of the NetRexx documentation is very
> old; someone surfing the net could quite easily receive the impression
> that NetRexx is defunct.)
>
> Any work being done to propose a newer version of NetRexx?    Or to
> implement one that includes a file object (and ideally GUI objects)
> ahead of the game?
>
> BTW Can anyone recommend a good program editor (and development
> environment if there is one) for NetRexx on OSX?   JEdit or LPEX
> perhaps?   Showing line numbers would be one convenient feature of
> course.
>
> Can anyone recommend a guide to programming in NetRexx that goes
> further then Mike's and the Red Book, including Rexx2nrx, an editor,
> simple things that can hold people back eg how to find the Terminal
> application / Command Line on your platform, solutions to the most
> common NetRexx installation problems (building on Mike's User Guide),
> and current most useful java classes (without assuming any knowledge
> of java).
>
> If not, if anyone has the time, such a Guide would be Really Useful.  
> Using the format adopted for the Illustrating series by Donald Alcock
> (he wrote Illustrating C, ...Fortran, ...Pascal and ...Basic), would
> be fantastic.   Alternatively, using the same intention as the CMS
> Primer; telling you just enough about all the tangential systems in
> order to allow you to do what you are setting out to do, (in our case
> programming in NetRexx) even where the information is not specifically
> about NetRexx itself.   This would help remove obstacles to new people
> discovering the joys of NetRexx.
>
> Connor.
>
> On 27 Feb 2010, at 07:53, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
>
>>
>> Many people have said they miss linein/charin etc. -- there's a good
>> argument for making a RexxFile kind of object part of the 'standard
>> runtime'.  Or even re-introducing/permitting static functions
>> perhaps, where
>> if the programmer writes:
>>
>> x=foo(bar, 2, 3)
>>
>> this would be treated as:
>>
>> x=bar.foo(2, 3)
>>
>> Would need some thought.
>>
>>> Is there any chance that NetRexx will move further to rexxify
>>> working with objects, eg by defining more rexx objects that
>>> work seamlessly with each other?
>>
>> That's up to the new owners of NetRexx :-).
>>
>> Mike
>>
>> _______
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Kermit Kiser]

Michael and all interested parties ;

If you are not too attached to your editor, you may want to try out the jEdit environment. There have been some new developments in NetRexx tools recently centered on that environment. jEdit provides fairly good syntax highlighting and two "plugin" development environments for NetRexx code: NetRexxDE is built around the NetRexx compiler and allows easy compile and execution of simple NetRexx programs. NetRexxScript is built around the NetRexx interpreter and allows quick execution of simple NetRexx programs directly from source code or from compiled classes.
The jEdit installation download can be found here:

http://www.jedit.org/index.php?page=download


Information about the NetRexxDE plugin can be found here:

http://kenai.com/projects/netrexx-misc/pages/NetRexxDE


Information about the NetRexxScript plugin can be found here:

http://kermitkiser.com/NetRexx/Script/NetRexxScript.html


I am currently building a simple jEdit IDE extension to NetRexxScript which provides an environment for developing Android (cell phone) applications in NetRexx. More info is here:

http://kermitkiser.com/AndRexx


There have been several recent reports of problems with classpath and other issues when installing the basic NetRexx distribution. The jEdit environment with NetRexx plugins bypasses most of those issues and is much easier to install and use than the basic NetRexx distribution. (jEdit has an "installer" to handle the details just as Java does and the NetRexxScript (and soon the NetRexxDE) plugin is a simple menu option to install and includes the NetRexx compiler/interpreter automatically.

Note that building complex NetRexx applications will probably require some Ant experience regardless of which path you choose.

-- Kermit


Michael Dag wrote:

Hi Rene,
I could certainly do with some good examples of 'how to do X with NetRexx',
for example with Java and VB 
you have these nice IDE's ***1* that prompt you with functions and
interactive debugging, 
with NetRexx I only have my UltraEdit editor which does not 'do' anything
for me to help me. I would love 
to find out how in general one can take a java package like for example sax
and use it in NetRexx 
*=(my java skills are simple too thin to Understand how it works that why I
use NetRexx!!!)*= , 
now I wrote my own XML parser... just because I don't know how the other
stuff works... 

***1* is there a NetRexx IDE that helps me develop code and run interactive
debug so I can find out more then
      peeking and poking the dark??? 

Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[[hidden email]] On Behalf Of René Jansen
Sent: zaterdag 27 februari 2010 15:53
To: IBM Netrexx
Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Development of NetRexx

Hi Connor,

the open sourcing process is its final stages. I agree that there has been
too much silence around NetRexx; part of this is because it just works, if
one compares it for example to the jruby list, where much of the traffic
concerns bugs and differences with MRI, we do not have that problem nor the
luxury of speaking about those all the time. There have been some classpath
issues on this list recently, but those are more platform problems
(including java as a platform) than issues with the translator
implementation.

The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are
only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that
changed around Netrexx). For other publications we are dependent on outside
authors. Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating
'buzz': there is not much to say about java integration and other things,
because unless, other languages, this just works without having to add all
kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say about 'how to
do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X is done in java.
There are no specific NetRexx external libraries - and I see that as a
strength, because who wants to discuss the design of an SQL library when you
can just do SQL over jdbc right now.

Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed functionality in
the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely remember contributing some
code to that. I'll look into the Donald Alcock series - I don't know the CMS
primer (do know the TSO Rexx book though, and I like its approach), if you
have a link that would be welcome. I think the work Chip recently put in to
verify installation on a specific platform deserves inclusion in some
publication soon.

best regards,

René.



On 27 feb 2010, at 14:56, Connor Birch wrote:

  

Hi,

So what is happening with NetRexx 'ownership'.   According to the RexxLA
    

website, IBM announced an intention, in April 2008, to pass it to the
RexxLA.   The RexxLA website tells us that they are in negotiation with IBM
about this.   Any progress since then?   (There is an image issue here, so
much of the NetRexx documentation is very old; someone surfing the net could
quite easily receive the impression that NetRexx is defunct.)
  

Any work being done to propose a newer version of NetRexx?    Or to
    

implement one that includes a file object (and ideally GUI objects) ahead of
the game?
  

BTW Can anyone recommend a good program editor (and development
    

environment if there is one) for NetRexx on OSX?   JEdit or LPEX perhaps?
Showing line numbers would be one convenient feature of course.
  

Can anyone recommend a guide to programming in NetRexx that goes further
    

then Mike's and the Red Book, including Rexx2nrx, an editor, simple things
that can hold people back eg how to find the Terminal application / Command
Line on your platform, solutions to the most common NetRexx installation
problems (building on Mike's User Guide), and current most useful java
classes (without assuming any knowledge of java).
  

If not, if anyone has the time, such a Guide would be Really Useful.
    

Using the format adopted for the Illustrating series by Donald Alcock (he
wrote Illustrating C, ...Fortran, ...Pascal and ...Basic), would be
fantastic.   Alternatively, using the same intention as the CMS Primer;
telling you just enough about all the tangential systems in order to allow
you to do what you are setting out to do, (in our case programming in
NetRexx) even where the information is not specifically about NetRexx
itself.   This would help remove obstacles to new people discovering the
joys of NetRexx.
  

Connor.

On 27 Feb 2010, at 07:53, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:

    

Many people have said they miss linein/charin etc. -- there's a good 
argument for making a RexxFile kind of object part of the 'standard 
runtime'.  Or even re-introducing/permitting static functions 
perhaps, where if the programmer writes:

x=foo(bar, 2, 3)

this would be treated as:

x=bar.foo(2, 3)

Would need some thought.

      

Is there any chance that NetRexx will move further to rexxify 
working with objects, eg by defining more rexx objects that work 
seamlessly with each other?
        

That's up to the new owners of NetRexx :-).

Mike

_______
      

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

    

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]



  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[David Requena]

El 27/02/2010 17:30, Connor Birch escribió:

13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving documentation that is available for download?

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[rvjansen]

On 27 feb 2010, at 17:30, Connor Birch wrote:

>>
>> The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that changed around Netrexx).
>
> 13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving documentation that is available for download?
>

Connor,

the official documentation was last revised in on the 22nd of May 2009, and is to be found here: http://speleotrove.com/misc/NetRexx2.pdf

best regards,

René Jansen.
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[George Hovey-2]

Re documentation, I took a look at a sample page from one of Donald Alcock's books.  I liked it, but it appeared to require some very special production tools.  A lower tech approach can be found in Ian Darwin's "Java Cookbook" (O'Reilly).  It is organized around short articles addressing narrowly defined tasks that one might want to perform, with no more context (but with pointers to more detail) than is required for the task at hand.  This book has "kick-started" many programs for me.  Of course, producing such a book requires vast technical knowledge and the ability to write concisely - a rare combination.

Please don't produce (only) a single, mammoth document.  I vote for individual PDFs restricted to specific areas as is the case now: language reference, chatty examples (Redbook), installation and running instructions, etc.  It is usually obvious which of these I should be using when searching for a term.  On those rare occasions when I am after a term used in any context, I use a combined PDF built from the components using Acrobat.  There is no chance that the (new) user won't know about these PDFs because they will all be listed and their scopes explained on the website.

As for developing docs using a WIKI approach, I wonder if this will work?  NetRexx, after all, was not produced by committee.  Of course, everyone should be allowed input, but consideration should be given to having a formal or informal editor who has the final say in case of disputes.

George Hovey

P.S.  What a relief to see this forum come alive after all these years!  It's a bit like those sci-fi films where the astronauts are awakened from cryogenic sleep as the ship approaches its destination.

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Connor Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi all,

There have been some classpath issues on this list recently, but those are more platform problems (including java as a platform) than issues with the translator implementation.

It doesn't matter where the problem comes from.   For the person who receives it, it is just as painful.   Comprehensive documentation can take away this pain, and hence is something we should aim for.    Certainly can't think of a reason why we wouldn't want to.  :-)

The 'official' documentation is going to be upgraded soon (but these are only meta- aspects like publishing date and updates of the things that changed around Netrexx).

13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving documentation that is available for download?

For other publications we are dependent on outside authors.

Nothing stopping us from documenting everything that new and experienced NetRexx programmers need documenting, regardless of outside authors.

Here, again, the high quality is in our disadvantage for generating 'buzz':

Perhaps we need a buzz of excitement about making what we have even better :-)   There is certainly scope (even if narrower than others). 

there is not much to say about java integration and other things, because unless, other languages, this just works without having to add all kinds of calling conventions. There is also not a lot to say about 'how to do X with NetRexx' because that mostly parallells how X is done in java. There are no specific NetRexx external libraries - and I see that as a strength, because who wants to discuss the design of an SQL library when you can just do SQL over jdbc right now.

That's why we are using NetRexx.

Thomas already did a lot of work in duplicating some missed functionality in the sense of doing I/O the Rexx way; I vaguely remember contributing some code to that.

Better to have this included in a new version of NetRexx, rather than as an add-on that someone has to find out about separately I would think.

I'll look into the Donald Alcock series -

They are excellent.   The author does not assume that the reader knows this or that, and hence explains every dot and comma, ensuring that the reader is fully enlightened.   A couple of special fonts are used, and the layout is part of the charm.

I don't know the CMS primer

When I first joined IBM (27 years ago), I had to learn how to use a multi-level mainframe operating system (VM & CP & CMS, + RACF, EXECIO etc), some programming languages, a sophisticated editor, communications etc.   Often something would not work, and since commands would pass though one system to another, I would be clueless in which 'subsystem' the problem lay.   The problems were mostly trivial and colleagues did not want to be continually pestered with trivial questions (or did not know the answer themselves).   After I had been through the pain, I discovered the book CMS Primer.   If I remember it correctly, it did not dwell on any particular system as the other manuals did, it told the user what was what, and what went where, giving the user enough of an introduction into everything on and around CMS, and how they fit together, to get them going.   If only I had had a copy of that book earlier.   Every system should have such a book.

I think the work Chip recently put in to verify installation on a specific platform deserves inclusion in some publication soon.

Yep, a group effort sounds most practical.    With the agreement of the authors and copyright holders, the various existing guides/tutorials could be combined into a single document.    As a new user, if I had proper softcopy of the Red Book, I would be happy to mark up the areas that I find unclear; allowing someone/somepeople with more experience to improve it.

Ideally, all the NetRexx user documentation should be combined into a single book, so once you have it, all your answerable questions are answered.   An additional book that a user does not know about is of no use to him.   Such a combined book could use wiki or other suitable technology to allow it to be improved by a host of people working collaboratively.    

Well, just a thought.  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[FreeFall]

Thanks guys for the info/help.

Lets see if I can tie these things together into something that can firm up into projects to take us forward: 

NetRexx 3 (or 2.1)

Seems that we have ideas for a future version of NetRexx, or at least additional classes.   Perhaps we should start a working group (sounds too formal) to define what this should look like.   A mail server is fine for bouncing ideas around, but not so good for constructing a definition document.   I'd recommend a wiki for this since everyone can contribute to the discussion card, and as ideas crystalise, people can edit the specification.   We can all moderate it or undo changes.   Sounds very scary to some, but it the approach works surprisingly well with wikipedia, facilitating a hugh amount of intellect and knowledge to be documented.   If we want to be more dynamic, this is the way to go I think.   As well as producing a final document, it allows ideas to be displayed and discussed, helping to iron out problems.

User (programer) Documentation

I didn't suggest putting all documentation into one document, but putting all of the user documentation (instructionals) into a single document.   Again a wiki would work well; whenever someone has a problem that has not previously been documented, whoever comes up with the answer can update the document directly, then point the someone at the revised document.   This would prevent the same problem from being repeatedly raised, and gradually ratchet up the comprehensiveness of the user documentation.   Google documents would be an alternative platform, but there are probably others.

At some later date perhaps, someone could undertake the more ambitious task of creating a book "Illustrating NetRexx" using the style used in Donald Alcock's Illustrating series, and the specialist tools of the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.   This is the best instructional style I have seen.   Illustrating BASIC was serialised in a popular home computer magazine in the early 1980's.   Serialising Illustrating NetRexx in a suitable magazine could do wonders for popularising NetRexx.  

<George, thanks for your recommendation of Darwin's Java Cookbook; I've ordered a copy.   What other books am I missing?> 

Wiki

It is possible for people to write nonsense on wiki documents, but this tends not to happen much; no one wants to look like an idiot, so they think through or use the wiki discussion facility to talk though their ideas before committing them to the document itself.   

George Hovey:

What a relief to see this forum come alive after all these years!  It's a bit like those sci-fi films where the astronauts are awakened from cryogenic sleep as the ship approaches its destination.  

Lets keep it alive, lets get people contributing.   The problem with human gate-keepers, is that whatever they are protecting starts to take on the personality of the gate keeper rather than the community.   If we want more rapid progress, we need to make people in our community feel empowered, rather than having to tug on someone else's apron strings.   Some good ideas and work may have gone largely unnoticed so far.   

Documentation & code Location

I would not have thought to look on a caving website for the latest NetRexx documentation (no disrespect, Mike, I've been crawling along underground river beds too).   It has to make sense to put all documents, wikis, NetRexx itself, extra run time packages, Rexx2Nrx, links to JEdit and the plugins etc in one place (or at least linked to from one place) on the web.   Take a look at http://community.ingres.com/ to give you an idea (though we could do a neater job, including putting all the downloads under a download tab).

Tom:
But I *do underline* the suggested approach below to have only -one-, -central- point of these efforts,
most probably Rene's www.NetRexx.org, only. :-)

Open Source Code

A library of open source utilities, development tools, and applications, available as nrx files, would be very useful, and reduce wheel inventing.    After all, some of us must have written some generally useful programs.   There should be such a place on the website for these.

Open Source NetRexx

Stepping Forward

There is a whole bunch of stuff here, so it may sound daunting, but we a whole bunch of people, mostly (I guess) technically savvy, so it is not an unreasonable ambition.   

Some of us have well recognised skills / knowledge and it may be obvious which role they occupy. 

I'm forming a new business at present and desperately lack time (I shouldn't be typing this really), and I've been non-technical for years (project management), but I'm happy to contribute my vision (as expressed here), ask difficult questions, ask idiot questions, and note where the user guide / red book would benefit from improvement (as seen from a new user's perspective).

Other (new) roles need other (new) people to come forward.   Volunteers?

  

Best regards,

   

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Mike Cowlishaw]

Hi, Connor, 

 

 Documentation & code Location

I would not have thought to look on a caving website for the latest NetRexx documentation (no disrespect, Mike, I've been crawling along underground river beds too).   It has to make sense to put all documents, wikis, NetRexx itself, extra run time packages, Rexx2Nrx, links to JEdit and the plugins etc in one place (or at least linked to from one place) on the web.   Take a look at http://community.ingres.com/ to give you an idea (though we could do a neater job, including putting all the downloads under a download tab). 

 

Tsk, tsk, it's not a caving website; it's a caver's website :-).   And the purpose of the NetRexx2 document was/is simply to merge the old Reference with the Supplement.  There's nothing new there; it's not 'the current documentation' any more than those original documents -- I merged them simply to make it easier to transfer to RexxLA.

But yes, my website is not, and should not be, the place to go for NetRexx information. 

 

Mike

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Just to let you know that I'm curretnly (and still) working on my *own
NetRexx* compiler.

... Just in case the open source IBM release does fail ...

Any help in collecting good test-cases will be welcome.

And also any other help.
Tom.
=====================================================================
David Requena schrieb:

>
> El 27/02/2010 17:30, Connor Birch escribió:
>> 13 years is a long time to go without a revision.  How about adopting
>> the more modern trend of continuously updating/improving
>> documentation that is available for download?
>
> Last revision 2.05 was in 2002 so it's been 8 years now :-)
>
> Right now, everything stops us from doing anything with NetRexx (as in the NetRexx language processor or its documentation). It is an IBM property. *If* and *when* the ongoing open sourcing process reaches a *positive* end, we'll be able to push it in any direction we see fit. RexxLA will be the central point for all things NetRexx related as it is today for oooREXX (three 'o's is OK?)
>
> Until then we, as a comunity, can only wait or write some user docs trying to help new users. Thanks Chip for a compreensive Windows how to!
>
>
> ---
> Saludos / Kind regards.
> David Requena
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[David Requena]

Conor (and others),

These things have been already been discussed at some length on the list recently.
There's a list archive at http://n3.nabble.com/ibm-netrexx-f215625.html.

In short:

- The open sourcing process takes the form of a hand over to the RexxLA. We still lack the knowledge about what that might exactly mean.

- No clue which license would be used. So no clue what we may be allowed to do once released.

- There is evidence a NetRexx v 3.00 already exists. What we propose as an improvement could well be already implemented or made unnecessary by new functionalities in the product.

- The open sourcing process seems to be in its last stages now. Comments by some people involved in the process seem to suggest that it's not a good moment to make much noise about the deal.

- RexxLA will provide infrastructure for the project as it now does with open ooRexx. At the moment the domain netrexx.org is secured but inactive. This might change in the near future.

I think that sums it up. Of course in the meantime we, the user community, can do whatever we want as long as we don't touch any IP.

Which brings me to another subject: people asking for updated documentation. At the moment, official docs are frozen. IBM could update them but seeing they haven't bothered to update their NetRexx web pages in years, that seems unlikely.

So you did read a wonderful introductory book on Common Lisp programming and would like to see the same thing for NetRexx? That's very much OK, you write it; at least you start it.

In any case saying: "Look, I had this wonderful idea and wrote this one hundred pages but I'm now stuck because I lack further knowledge. Could someone help me with this project?" will take you farther than coming to the list with a list of books you want someone to invest their spare time in writing them for you.

If I had kept asking for someone updating NetRexxJe, we wouldn't have NetRexxDE working on latest version of jEdit now...


El 01/03/2010 14:31, Connor Birch escribió:

Thanks guys for the info/help.

Lets see if I can tie these things together into something that can firm up into projects to take us forward: 

NetRexx 3 (or 2.1)

Seems that we have ideas for a future version of NetRexx, or at least additional classes.   Perhaps we should start a working group (sounds too formal) to define what this should look like.   A mail server is fine for bouncing ideas around, but not so good for constructing a definition document.   I'd recommend a wiki for this since everyone can contribute to the discussion card, and as ideas crystalise, people can edit the specification.   We can all moderate it or undo changes.   Sounds very scary to some, but it the approach works surprisingly well with wikipedia, facilitating a hugh amount of intellect and knowledge to be documented.   If we want to be more dynamic, this is the way to go I think.   As well as producing a final document, it allows ideas to be displayed and discussed, helping to iron out problems.

User (programer) Documentation

I didn't suggest putting all documentation into one document, but putting all of the user documentation (instructionals) into a single document.   Again a wiki would work well; whenever someone has a problem that has not previously been documented, whoever comes up with the answer can update the document directly, then point the someone at the revised document.   This would prevent the same problem from being repeatedly raised, and gradually ratchet up the comprehensiveness of the user documentation.   Google documents would be an alternative platform, but there are probably others.

At some later date perhaps, someone could undertake the more ambitious task of creating a book "Illustrating NetRexx" using the style used in Donald Alcock's Illustrating series, and the specialist tools of the Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.   This is the best instructional style I have seen.   Illustrating BASIC was serialised in a popular home computer magazine in the early 1980's.   Serialising Illustrating NetRexx in a suitable magazine could do wonders for popularising NetRexx.  

<George, thanks for your recommendation of Darwin's Java Cookbook; I've ordered a copy.   What other books am I missing?> 

Wiki

It is possible for people to write nonsense on wiki documents, but this tends not to happen much; no one wants to look like an idiot, so they think through or use the wiki discussion facility to talk though their ideas before committing them to the document itself.   

George Hovey:

What a relief to see this forum come alive after all these years!  It's a bit like those sci-fi films where the astronauts are awakened from cryogenic sleep as the ship approaches its destination.  

Lets keep it alive, lets get people contributing.   The problem with human gate-keepers, is that whatever they are protecting starts to take on the personality of the gate keeper rather than the community.   If we want more rapid progress, we need to make people in our community feel empowered, rather than having to tug on someone else's apron strings.   Some good ideas and work may have gone largely unnoticed so far.   

Documentation & code Location

I would not have thought to look on a caving website for the latest NetRexx documentation (no disrespect, Mike, I've been crawling along underground river beds too).   It has to make sense to put all documents, wikis, NetRexx itself, extra run time packages, Rexx2Nrx, links to JEdit and the plugins etc in one place (or at least linked to from one place) on the web.   Take a look at http://community.ingres.com/ to give you an idea (though we could do a neater job, including putting all the downloads under a download tab).

Tom:
But I *do underline* the suggested approach below to have only -one-, -central- point of these efforts,
most probably Rene's www.NetRexx.org, only. :-)

Open Source Code

A library of open source utilities, development tools, and applications, available as nrx files, would be very useful, and reduce wheel inventing.    After all, some of us must have written some generally useful programs.   There should be such a place on the website for these.

Open Source NetRexx

Stepping Forward

There is a whole bunch of stuff here, so it may sound daunting, but we a whole bunch of people, mostly (I guess) technically savvy, so it is not an unreasonable ambition.   

Some of us have well recognised skills / knowledge and it may be obvious which role they occupy. 

I'm forming a new business at present and desperately lack time (I shouldn't be typing this really), and I've been non-technical for years (project management), but I'm happy to contribute my vision (as expressed here), ask difficult questions, ask idiot questions, and note where the user guide / red book would benefit from improvement (as seen from a new user's perspective).

Other (new) roles need other (new) people to come forward.   Volunteers?

  

Best regards,

   

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

  

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[FreeFall]

Thanks David,

> In short:
>
> - The open sourcing process takes the form of a hand over to the  
> RexxLA. We still lack the knowledge about what that might exactly  
> mean.

Why do we lack knowledge?   Why is the process so opaque?   Even if  
there were some legal issues about pre-announcement, it is not obvious  
why it is taking so long to make the transition, especially as the  
intention has already be announced.  Entire corporations are brought,  
sold, merged, or separated in considerably less time.
>
> - No clue which license would be used. So no clue what we may be  
> allowed to do once released.

Does someone somewhere have a clue?   Why is this not being discussed/
communicated with us?   Any reason why the users should not be  
permitted to express a preference?

> - There is evidence a NetRexx v 3.00 already exists. What we propose  
> as an improvement could well be already implemented or made  
> unnecessary by new functionalities in the product.

Okay, that's the first possibility that makes sense.    It doesn't  
completely explain how that stopped v2 from being placed in the public  
domain thus far, but is close enough (development schedules  do slip,  
v3, if that's the version for open sourcing, might have been expected  
a lot earlier).

> - The open sourcing process seems to be in its last stages now.  
> Comments by some people involved in the process seem to suggest that  
> it's not a good moment to make much noise about the deal.

I'm not interfering, I'm questioning.   It's only human to question,  
right?    It would be easier not to question, if we had a clear  
statement from someone in the know what is going on, or at least why  
we can't be told.   Maybe you guys already know why we are not allowed  
to ask questions, or have got used to it, but I'm still fresh from  
outside.  :-)   Perhaps someone will whisper the reason in my ear too,  
and I'll not need to ask more  ;-)

Regards,

Connor.
[hidden email]


_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[David Requena]

Conor,

I don't have the answers; I'm not involved at all in this.

What I gather from what has been already posted to the list is that
possibly IBM has chosen to
bury the whole thing in some strong NDAs.

I'm also told that NDAs exist which forbid public discussion of their
content or even acknowledgement of their very  existence. Not that I
would now if it were the case here...

---
Saludos / Kind regards.
David Requena


El 02/03/2010 17:21, Connor Birch escribió:

> Thanks David,
>
>> In short:
>>
>> - The open sourcing process takes the form of a hand over to the
>> RexxLA. We still lack the knowledge about what that might exactly mean.
>
> Why do we lack knowledge?   Why is the process so opaque?   Even if
> there were some legal issues about pre-announcement, it is not obvious
> why it is taking so long to make the transition, especially as the
> intention has already be announced.  Entire corporations are brought,
> sold, merged, or separated in considerably less time.
>>
>> - No clue which license would be used. So no clue what we may be
>> allowed to do once released.
>
> Does someone somewhere have a clue?   Why is this not being
> discussed/communicated with us?   Any reason why the users should not
> be permitted to express a preference?
>
>> - There is evidence a NetRexx v 3.00 already exists. What we propose
>> as an improvement could well be already implemented or made
>> unnecessary by new functionalities in the product.
>
> Okay, that's the first possibility that makes sense.    It doesn't
> completely explain how that stopped v2 from being placed in the public
> domain thus far, but is close enough (development schedules  do slip,
> v3, if that's the version for open sourcing, might have been expected
> a lot earlier).
>
>> - The open sourcing process seems to be in its last stages now.
>> Comments by some people involved in the process seem to suggest that
>> it's not a good moment to make much noise about the deal.
>
> I'm not interfering, I'm questioning.   It's only human to question,
> right?    It would be easier not to question, if we had a clear
> statement from someone in the know what is going on, or at least why
> we can't be told.   Maybe you guys already know why we are not allowed
> to ask questions, or have got used to it, but I'm still fresh from
> outside.  :-)   Perhaps someone will whisper the reason in my ear too,
> and I'll not need to ask more  ;-)
>
> Regards,
>
> Connor.
> [hidden email]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Mike Cowlishaw]

 
> I don't have the answers; I'm not involved at all in this.
>
> What I gather from what has been already posted to the list
> is that possibly IBM has chosen to bury the whole thing in
> some strong NDAs.

This is not the case.

> I'm also told that NDAs exist which forbid public discussion
> of their content or even acknowledgement of their very  
> existence. Not that I would now if it were the case here...

This is also not the case.  I am not aware of any such Non Disclosure
Agreements, and as owner of the software in question any such agreement
would be suspect.  

Please let this work through the proper channels, and not speculate :-).

Mike

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Jerry McBride-2]

On Tuesday 02 March 2010 14:58:29 you wrote:

> > I don't have the answers; I'm not involved at all in this.
> >
> > What I gather from what has been already posted to the list
> > is that possibly IBM has chosen to bury the whole thing in
> > some strong NDAs.
>
> This is not the case.
>
> > I'm also told that NDAs exist which forbid public discussion
> > of their content or even acknowledgement of their very
> > existence. Not that I would now if it were the case here...
>
> This is also not the case.  I am not aware of any such Non Disclosure
> Agreements, and as owner of the software in question any such agreement
> would be suspect.
>
> Please let this work through the proper channels, and not speculate :-).
>
> Mike

I'll drink to that, Mike. I've waited this long... a few more weeks or months
won't make a difference.


Cheers!


--

*****************************************************************************
                                       
                             From the desk of:
                             Jerome D. McBride
                                       
   18:02:32 up 72 days,  4:38,  3 users,  load average: 0.90, 0.42, 0.20
 
*****************************************************************************
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]