ibm-netrexx

Distractions

Classic

List

Threaded

10 messages Options

Aviatrexx

Distractions

Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open Source NetRexx in
our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and enhancement that we have been
discussing.

I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren? signs the
official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping him to shepherd this
project through the IBM bureaucracy.

Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?, being the
point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to address. In addition to the
demands of his real job, of course.

Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities until we hear that
there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for us to use.

Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he knew he could
call on me if needed) with anything I can do that does not require me to already
have an NDA.

Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start discussing how we're
going to roast it?

-Chip-

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Distractions

OK,
sorry when I distracted anybody....
I will be quiet (for a while, you know)
... when I have been the +culprit in question+.

And I will try to finish my own things (when you meant me ...)

Kind regards to the marvelous community ibm-netrexx ..
Thomas Schneider (vulgo Tom).

=================================================================
Chip Davis schrieb:

> Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open Source
> NetRexx in our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and enhancement
> that we have been discussing.
>
> I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren?
> signs the official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping him
> to shepherd this project through the IBM bureaucracy.
>
> Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?,
> being the point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to
> address. In addition to the demands of his real job, of course.
>
> Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities until we
> hear that there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for us to use.
>
> Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he knew
> he could call on me if needed) with anything I can do that does not
> require me to already have an NDA.
>
> Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start discussing
> how we're going to roast it?
>
> -Chip-
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

David Requena

Distractions

In reply to this post by Aviatrexx

Dear Chip & All,

I'm sorry for such a long email.
Seems my verbiage gets exacerbated at late night :-)

2010/2/12 Chip Davis <[hidden email]>

> Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open Source
> NetRexx in our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and enhancement that
> we have been discussing.
>
> I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren? signs the
> official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping him to shepherd this
> project through the IBM bureaucracy.
>

Agreed. But..

I think most of what we've been discussing here has nothing to do with
the open sourcing on NetRexx.

Yes, NetRexx will eventually be open sourced. But I don't expect that to be
soon. The legalese may take still a loooong time. We've heard something
about 2010 which'd be max 10 months but knowing the nature of these things,
that could very well mean fall 2013.

That is by no means all. Nobody has stated that the RexxLA will release
sources immediately after finalization of the handover.
It may take a while for them assemble a technical board, organizing a
governance structure, then review code, decide on the proper schedule, and
whatnot.

I'm told, RexxLA today is more of a REXX/ooREXX oriented community so this
could also add a bit.

Yes, we may still be waiting for quite a bit!

Another problem is that the terms under which NetRexx will be released have
not been disclosed. We don't know if we'll be interested at all on the
delivered
product.

What if it came out under an academic-use-only license?
How about a strictly non-comercial type one?

I don't anticipate this but it could happen.
Where that the case, I wouldn't probably much be interested. Sorry I have
some
real work to do. I would even like to get my competitive advantage
out NetRexx
for some commercial venture someday.

Note that an open source license can be much more restrictive regarding to
the use you may do of the product than a closed source one.
These are in fact disparate qualities.

Not that I'm saying I won't be able to. I just don't know. And I just don't
know when.
Maybe I'll stick with closed source 2.05 even then...

Just a few reasons not to get to impatient...

> Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?, being the
> point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to address. In addition to
> the demands of his real job, of course.
>

Agreed.
Ren? already stated he'd said all that he could. We should expect no more
regarding the open sourcing for now. No point in continually disturbing him
about either.

> Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities until we hear
> that there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for us to use.
>

Here I strongly disagree.

True,it's amazing how NetRexx withstood the passing of time. We're not
dealing
in an IBM's big iron world here, this is another leage.

Anyway NetRexx (the product, not the language) is ageing.
New users are getting trouble installing it. Old timers are getting into
trouble when
updating their jvms. These things are happening today.

NetRexx today cannot be modified in any way, right. So..

What is preventing us setting some website with current tips, tricks and
best
practices?
What is preventing us compiling these into a short document which gets
posted
to the list once a month for our very few newcomers?
What is preventing us building tools, support lbraries or whatever needed
around NetRexx 2.05.?
What is preventing us to give the language properly sized and argumented
article
in the Wikipedia?

Will an open source release magically get us started doing these things?

In other words: While NetRexx today may be frozen, ***we shouldn't be***

Sitting down and hoping that NetRexx is going to be reborn into a golden
age of ripe success just because it's going to be open sourced is indeed
moot.
There're already lots of open sourced compilers for all kind of languages
proprietary or free alike.

"stopping NetRexx activities" in such a context does not sound good to me.
In my humble opinion, now, more then ever, is the moment to get active.
Paving
the way for a successful launch of our long anticipated open source NetRexx.
Be it whenever ;-)

As a final thought I'd like to add that in my view the so called NetRexx
community
already failed once. Being the owner of the only existent implementation
leaving
it stagnating for such a long time should have prompted the birth of some
open
source one. That is: if a strong lively community had existed around the
language!

There was once one such initiative in fact. Cannot find it any more among my
bookmarks. I joined. We were three clueless guys though. As usual up to now,
no outcome.

> Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he knew he
> could call on me if needed) with anything I can do that does not require me
> to already have an NDA.
>

I already offered to collaborate with him feeding content to netrexx.org,
should it be activated.
The kinds of things listed above belong there I believe.

I'm afraid there's not much more IBM outsiders can do at this time.

>
> Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start discussing how
> we're going to roast it?
>
> -Chip-
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

--
Saludos / Regards,
David Requena
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100213/16913fec/attachment-0001.html

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Distractions

Hi David,
*totally agreed*.

And when Rene (a very good personal friend of mine since at leat 1 decade)
will need any assistance

He should say so. From the business point of vie, I cannot help him (I
never have been a BUSINESS man).

From the technical point of view:

Most probably I can help a lot (I do know Rexx and Netrexx quite well....)

Thomas.
========================================================
David Requena schrieb:

> Dear Chip & All,
>
> I'm sorry for such a long email.
> Seems my verbiage gets exacerbated at late night :-)
>
> 2010/2/12 Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
> Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open
> Source NetRexx in our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and
> enhancement that we have been discussing.
>
> I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren?
> signs the official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping
> him to shepherd this project through the IBM bureaucracy.
>
>
> Agreed. But..
>
> I think most of what we've been discussing here has nothing to do with
> the open sourcing on NetRexx.
>
> Yes, NetRexx will eventually be open sourced. But I don't expect that
> to be
> soon. The legalese may take still a loooong time. We've heard something
> about 2010 which'd be max 10 months but knowing the nature of these
> things,
> that could very well mean fall 2013.
>
> That is by no means all. Nobody has stated that the RexxLA will release
> sources immediately after finalization of the handover.
> It may take a while for them assemble a technical board, organizing a
> governance structure, then review code, decide on the proper schedule,
> and whatnot.
>
> I'm told, RexxLA today is more of a REXX/ooREXX oriented community so this
> could also add a bit.
>
> Yes, we may still be waiting for quite a bit!
>
> Another problem is that the terms under which NetRexx will
> be released have
> not been disclosed. We don't know if we'll be interested at all on the
> delivered
> product.
>
> What if it came out under an academic-use-only license?
> How about a strictly non-comercial type one?
>
> I don't anticipate this but it could happen.
> Where that the case, I wouldn't probably much be interested. Sorry I
> have some
> real work to do. I would even like to get my competitive advantage
> out NetRexx
> for some commercial venture someday.
>
> Note that an open source license can be much more restrictive regarding to
> the use you may do of the product than a closed source one.
> These are in fact disparate qualities.
>
> Not that I'm saying I won't be able to. I just don't know. And I just
> don't know when.
> Maybe I'll stick with closed source 2.05 even then...
>
> Just a few reasons not to get to impatient...
>
>
>
> Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?,
> being the point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to
> address. In addition to the demands of his real job, of course.
>
>
> Agreed.
> Ren? already stated he'd said all that he could. We should expect no more
> regarding the open sourcing for now. No point in
> continually disturbing him
> about either.
>
>
>
> Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities
> until we hear that there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for
> us to use.
>
>
> Here I strongly disagree.
>
> True,it's amazing how NetRexx withstood the passing of time. We're not
> dealing
> in an IBM's big iron world here, this is another leage.
>
> Anyway NetRexx (the product, not the language) is ageing.
> New users are getting trouble installing it. Old timers are getting
> into trouble when
> updating their jvms. These things are happening today.
>
> NetRexx today cannot be modified in any way, right. So..
>
> What is preventing us setting some website with current tips, tricks
> and best
> practices?
> What is preventing us compiling these into a short document which gets
> posted
> to the list once a month for our very few newcomers?
> What is preventing us building tools, support lbraries or whatever needed
> around NetRexx 2.05.?
> What is preventing us to give the language properly sized and
> argumented article
> in the Wikipedia?
>
> Will an open source release magically get us started doing these things?
>
> In other words: While NetRexx today may be frozen, ***we shouldn't be***
>
> Sitting down and hoping that NetRexx is going to be reborn into a golden
> age of ripe success just because it's going to be open sourced is
> indeed moot.
> There're already lots of open sourced compilers for all kind of languages
> proprietary or free alike.
>
> "stopping NetRexx activities" in such a context does not sound good to me.
> In my humble opinion, now, more then ever, is the moment to get
> active. Paving
> the way for a successful launch of our long anticipated open source
> NetRexx.
> Be it whenever ;-)
>
> As a final thought I'd like to add that in my view the so called
> NetRexx community
> already failed once. Being the owner of the
> only existent implementation leaving
> it stagnating for such a long time should have prompted the birth of
> some open
> source one. That is: if a strong lively community had existed around
> the language!
>
> There was once one such initiative in fact. Cannot find it any more
> among my
> bookmarks. I joined. We were three clueless guys though. As usual up
> to now,
> no outcome.
>
>
>
> Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he
> knew he could call on me if needed) with anything I can do that
> does not require me to already have an NDA.
>
>
> I already offered to collaborate with him feeding content to
> netrexx.org <http://netrexx.org>, should it be activated.
> The kinds of things listed above belong there I believe.
>
> I'm afraid there's not much more IBM outsiders can do at this time.
>
>
>
> Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start
> discussing how we're going to roast it?
>
> -Chip-
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

Kermit Kiser

Distractions

In reply to this post by Aviatrexx

Hi Chip ;

Are you suggesting that NetRexx might not achieve open source?

This community has not had the time and skill set to create an
independent open source version in the past although some effort was
expended in that direction. And once Mike retires from IBM, there may
not be the skill, resources or priority at IBM to maintain and enhance
NetRexx.either. Granted there has been no strong need to modify NetRexx
code in the last five years, but it seems that time has ended. Clearly,
NetRexx either achieves open source now or it dies.

Regardless, even though I have suspended further development of NetRexx
scripting engines pending the OSS release, I have no intention of
suspending any other NetRexx activities. Even Ren? has suggested that we
continue to develop the tools and infrastructure surrounding NetRexx
without worrying about the core compiler/interpreter piece of the puzzle
at this time.

If we are doing anything that interferes with the progress IBM and Ren?
are making, I am sure that Ren? will let us know so that we can get out
of their way.

Meanwhile, I suggest that we do what we can with what we have.

-- Kermit

Chip Davis wrote:

Aviatrexx

Distractions

(Private note, please do not share.)

Hi Kermit,

I am indeed concerned that NetRexx may not attain Open Source status. There is
only one person working part-time to navigate the minefield that is IBM's
bureaucracy (and legal department). And that person is Ren?, who has a
full-time job that has to take top priority.

The problem is that NetRexx is very much Mike Cowlishaw's baby. The fact that
it still exists and can be downloaded from an IBM website is solely due to his
intervention.

He has two weeks before he takes early retirement. There is absolutely no
assurance that some mid-level bean-counter won't decide that the resources
necessary to keep NetRexx around are superfluous and summarily yank the package
from the site. In fact, Mike seems to think that in the current austere IBM
environment, that it is very likely. And he won't be around to prevent it.

At that point, there will be no IBM NetRexx, no Open NetRexx, no IBM-NetRexx
discussion list, nothing except whatever (source-less, and thus pretty useless)
package you have downloaded. End of story. Not even Mike can release his own
source code at that point.

Ren? is the key to getting NetRexx transferred to RexxLA, and the time is
getting very short before we lose our primary benefactor, patron, and protector
(Mike).

Every time something comes up on the discussion list that requires Ren?'s
attention, we are diverting him from the more critical task at hand. It doesn't
appear that he is willing to let us know when we are getting in his way. I
can't blame him; it's been so long since there was any interest expressed in
NetRexx that it's hard not to want to get involved in all the discussion.

Besides, as I said, until this is a done-deal, all this noise is moot.

Now if we could just get Thomas back on his meds... :-/

-Chip-

On 2/13/10 08:51 Kermit Kiser said:

> Hi Chip ;
>
> Are you suggesting that NetRexx might not achieve open source?
>
> This community has not had the time and skill set to create an
> independent open source version in the past although some effort was
> expended in that direction. And once Mike retires from IBM, there may
> not be the skill, resources or priority at IBM to maintain and enhance
> NetRexx.either. Granted there has been no strong need to modify NetRexx
> code in the last five years, but it seems that time has ended. Clearly,
> NetRexx either achieves open source now or it dies.
>
> Regardless, even though I have suspended further development of NetRexx
> scripting engines pending the OSS release, I have no intention of
> suspending any other NetRexx activities. Even Ren? has suggested that we
> continue to develop the tools and infrastructure surrounding NetRexx
> without worrying about the core compiler/interpreter piece of the puzzle
> at this time.
>
> If we are doing anything that interferes with the progress IBM and Ren?
> are making, I am sure that Ren? will let us know so that we can get out
> of their way.
>
> Meanwhile, I suggest that we do what we can with what we have.
>
> -- Kermit
>
>
> Chip Davis wrote:
>> Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open Source
>> NetRexx in our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and enhancement
>> that we have been discussing.
>>
>> I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren?
>> signs the official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping him
>> to shepherd this project through the IBM bureaucracy.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?,
>> being the point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to
>> address. In addition to the demands of his real job, of course.
>>
>> Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities until we
>> hear that there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for us to use.
>>
>> Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he knew
>> he could call on me if needed) with anything I can do that does not
>> require me to already have an NDA.
>>
>> Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start discussing
>> how we're going to roast it?
>>
>> -Chip-
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Fernando Cassia-2

Distractions

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

> (Private note, please do not share.)
>
> Hi Kermit,
>
> I am indeed concerned that NetRexx may not attain Open Source status. ?There
> is only one person working part-time to navigate the minefield that is IBM's
> bureaucracy (and legal department). ?And that person is Ren?, who has a
> full-time job that has to take top priority.
>
> The problem is that NetRexx is very much Mike Cowlishaw's baby. ?The fact
> that it still exists and can be downloaded from an IBM website is solely due
> to his intervention.
>
> He has two weeks before he takes early retirement. ?There is absolutely no
> assurance that some mid-level bean-counter won't decide that the resources
> necessary to keep NetRexx around are superfluous and summarily yank the
> package from the site. ?In fact, Mike seems to think that in the current
> austere IBM environment, that it is very likely. ?And he won't be around to
> prevent it.

My view is that if there?s some bureaucrat preventing this code from
being released, he should be named, publicly. Also, a public petition
should be presented (think: Slashdot.org, petitiononline.com),
bypassing whatever layers of bureaucracy there might be, to the
highest position in the IBM software hierarchy that would listen.

I mean, isnt?t there an "open source guru" at IBM?. Isn?t it likely
that he has done the "paper pushing" before to get code released as
open source? (i.e. IBM JFS file system).

Wouldn?t such a higher-level manager have the required skills and
experience to get this done quick?.

Just my $0.02.
FC
PS: If there?s one thing I learned about corporations, is that the
stupid get out of the way once the company risks being portrayed
negatively in the media, and that managers do whatever they can to
prevent bad press reports on their employers...

David Requena

Distractions

In reply to this post by Kermit Kiser

Kermit,

I see we tend to agree a lot.
I also see you're much better than me at expressing this things :-)

2010/2/13 Kermit Kiser <[hidden email]>

> Hi Chip ;
>
> Are you suggesting that NetRexx might not achieve open source?
>
> This community has not had the time and skill set to create an independent
> open source version in the past although some effort was expended in that
> direction. And once Mike retires from IBM, there may not be the skill,
> resources or priority at IBM to maintain and enhance NetRexx.either. Granted
> there has been no strong need to modify NetRexx code in the last five years,
> but it seems that time has ended. Clearly, NetRexx either achieves open
> source now or it dies.
>
> Regardless, even though I have suspended further development of NetRexx
> scripting engines pending the OSS release, I have no intention of
> suspending any other NetRexx activities. Even Ren? has suggested that we
> continue to develop the tools and infrastructure surrounding NetRexx without
> worrying about the core compiler/interpreter piece of the puzzle at this
> time.
>
> If we are doing anything that interferes with the progress IBM and Ren? are
> making, I am sure that Ren? will let us know so that we can get out of their
> way.
>
> Meanwhile, I suggest that we do what we can with what we have.
>
> -- Kermit
>
>
>
> Chip Davis wrote:
>
>> Folks, I know that we are all chomping at the bit to get Open Source
>> NetRexx in our own hands and tend to all the anomalies and enhancement that
>> we have been discussing.
>>
>> I must point out that this is not a done-deal however, until Ren? signs
>> the official IBM forms. I don't know if anyone is helping him to shepherd
>> this project through the IBM bureaucracy.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it seems that we keep raising questions that Ren?, being
>> the point of the spear at this time, makes an effort to address. In
>> addition to the demands of his real job, of course.
>>
>> Therefore, I for one will be suspending my NetRexx activities until we
>> hear that there actually _is_ an Open Source NetRexx for us to use.
>>
>> Also, I'm formally offering to assist him (although I assumed he knew he
>> could call on me if needed) with anything I can do that does not require me
>> to already have an NDA.
>>
>> Can we all wait until this chick is hatched before we start discussing how
>> we're going to roast it?
>>
>> -Chip-
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Aviatrexx

Distractions

In reply to this post by Aviatrexx

Well, I screwed that one pretty good. :-(

(I _had_ changed to To: address but in a bit of cut-n-paste I opened a new reply
and didn't notice that the discussion list return address had returned. Oh well...)

-Chip-

On 2/13/10 16:55 Chip Davis said:
> (Private note, please do not share.)

rvjansen

Distractions

In reply to this post by Fernando Cassia-2

Gentlemen,

this is exactly what we don't need now. I strongly suggest you hold your horses - para el carro. Ahora.

Ren?.

On 13 feb 2010, at 19:28, Fernando Cassia wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 1:55 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> (Private note, please do not share.)
>>
>> Hi Kermit,
>>
>> I am indeed concerned that NetRexx may not attain Open Source status. There
>> is only one person working part-time to navigate the minefield that is IBM's
>> bureaucracy (and legal department). And that person is Ren?, who has a
>> full-time job that has to take top priority.
>>
>> The problem is that NetRexx is very much Mike Cowlishaw's baby. The fact
>> that it still exists and can be downloaded from an IBM website is solely due
>> to his intervention.
>>
>> He has two weeks before he takes early retirement. There is absolutely no
>> assurance that some mid-level bean-counter won't decide that the resources
>> necessary to keep NetRexx around are superfluous and summarily yank the
>> package from the site. In fact, Mike seems to think that in the current
>> austere IBM environment, that it is very likely. And he won't be around to
>> prevent it.
>
> My view is that if there?s some bureaucrat preventing this code from
> being released, he should be named, publicly. Also, a public petition
> should be presented (think: Slashdot.org, petitiononline.com),
> bypassing whatever layers of bureaucracy there might be, to the
> highest position in the IBM software hierarchy that would listen.
>
> I mean, isnt?t there an "open source guru" at IBM?. Isn?t it likely
> that he has done the "paper pushing" before to get code released as
> open source? (i.e. IBM JFS file system).
>
> Wouldn?t such a higher-level manager have the required skills and
> experience to get this done quick?.
>
> Just my $0.02.
> FC
> PS: If there?s one thing I learned about corporations, is that the
> stupid get out of the way once the company risks being portrayed
> negatively in the media, and that managers do whatever they can to
> prevent bad press reports on their employers...
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>