NetRexx problems: when would they be resolved?

[ThSITC]

Hello there all,

    since a couple of years (e.g. since MFC abandoned NetRexx Support,
and speaking has been about
opening it's source) NetRexx, as a matter of fact, is a FROZEN product :-(

    Whil'st I can live with that, I'm encountering a couple of
minor/major issues I would like to

a) report to the proper parties.
b) get resolved before the next release.

As some (most) of them do occur only with more hughe NetRexx pplications
(like mine),
I cannot report them properly, as I cannot attach the samples on
ibm-netrexx.

As already said, I can live with it, but I do personally think time has
come that some
actions will be needed.

Hence, my question:

What is, nowaday, the realistic time-frame of the IBM NetRexx Open
Source release (when
it will happen at all) ?

Could Rene and/or Mike give us all, please a guestimate (best estimate),
at least?

As all of my software does now rely on NetRexx stability, I would need
an answer, please,
as most of us, to make our own proper schedules!


Thanks for any insight into this issue, in advance. :-)

Thomas.

--
Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com)
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Robert L Hamilton]

First of all, we do not know that NetRexx inside IBM is frozen.  They might be maintaining it if in fact they have a lot of NetRexx stuff running in JVM.  I suspect this is what the delay is about.  Would they want two versions around; one inside and one being maintained elsewhere.  ????

JAT

BOBH

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 10:28 AM, Thomas Schneider <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello there all,

   whack. . . . 

 

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[billfen]

Thomas, questions about the source release schedule have been asked here
since 2008 or 2009.  None have been answered in substance.

As you may recall, I suggested quite some time ago that a letter of
inquiry should be sent to IBM legal, but everyone thought that was a bad
idea.  If a major company announces an intention to do something and
then fails to do it, they may be responsible for damages.  Certainly I'm
not going to sue IBM because I spent a lot of time and effort based on
their promise to open source NetRexx, but you can see why IBM is
normally very careful about its public intentions.

Last week I sent an email to a high level IBM manager who is very
knowledgeable in the open source business.  I asked him to help in
moving the process along, and I sent copies to the principles (V. Hein,
Rene and MFC).  To date none of the four have responded.  Possibly they
have decided to ignore me as well as the issue, but it has only been a
few days and it is too soon to draw that conclusion.

My next suggestion is that a public information campaign be carefully
planned and started.  That would include such things as email and snail
mail letters to IBM, all of the "open source community" organizations,
the leading computer industry publications, news sites and blogs, and
the major public discussion groups.  Did you know that Slashdot (Alexa
global traffic rank 1323) gets 5.5 million hits per month?  Or that
StackOverflow, Reddit and Digg have Alexa ranks better than 135?  
(Google is 1, Facebook is 2).

A public "open letter" to "The IBM Corporation" might actually be
answered, particularly if the story went viral.  An amazing number of
people have very strong feelings about open source.

The basic question is: "It has been over three years.  When is IBM going
to keep its promise to open source NetRexx?"

Perhaps IBM will be responsive to some gentle public pressure.

Bill


On 4/12/2011 11:28 AM, Thomas Schneider wrote:

> Hello there all,
>
>    since a couple of years (e.g. since MFC abandoned NetRexx Support,
> and speaking has been about
> opening it's source) NetRexx, as a matter of fact, is a FROZEN product
> :-(
>
>    Whil'st I can live with that, I'm encountering a couple of
> minor/major issues I would like to
>
> a) report to the proper parties.
> b) get resolved before the next release.
>
> As some (most) of them do occur only with more hughe NetRexx
> pplications (like mine),
> I cannot report them properly, as I cannot attach the samples on
> ibm-netrexx.
>
> As already said, I can live with it, but I do personally think time
> has come that some
> actions will be needed.
>
> Hence, my question:
>
> What is, nowaday, the realistic time-frame of the IBM NetRexx Open
> Source release (when
> it will happen at all) ?
>
> Could Rene and/or Mike give us all, please a guestimate (best
> estimate), at least?
>
> As all of my software does now rely on NetRexx stability, I would need
> an answer, please,
> as most of us, to make our own proper schedules!
>
>
> Thanks for any insight into this issue, in advance. :-)
>
> Thomas.
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[ThSITC]

Hi Bill,
    I *do* currently have a totally other point than you:

I'm in active negotiations with IBM Austria here in Vienna, as they do
want to use my PP (The Program Porting Machine, see www.thsitc.com,
company profile) by a couple of major Austrian companies...

I'm just introducing them to the powers of IBM NetRexx.

They didn't even know it (IBM NetRexx) , at all, as all this
conversion/migration/porting Business is currently done using iBM
Rational Rose products.

As a matter of fact: They *are* now interested, but we (the ibm-netrexx
community) must cme up as quick as possible with a
functioning URL (I think, www.netrexx.org has been founded for this reason).

When I will not get a valid reply with some realistic release days, I
will do the following:

-- Copy all references I do find, to www.thsitc.com, product ReyC
-- use the fact, that IBM NetRexx is owned by IBM as a sales argument
for my PP.
--  and get some reference implementations here in Austria :-)

.. As I did say to Mike Cowlishaw, years ago, when I did write Rexx2Nrx:

NetRexx is the *best designed* Computer Language I've ever seen (and I
do know and did use  a LOT of them, trust me ;-))

I do, meanwhile, think, that open sourcing NetRexx is *NOT* as important
than *spreading knowledge* of this marvelous language:

-- by an OPEN USER GROUP
-- by an ACTIVE user GROUP
-- by quickly adapting to customer/user requirements.

I do agree: That's my personal point of view.

My personal attitude is to improve the 'ideas' and 'concepts' of NetRexx
in Rey ;-)

Thomas.
=================================================================================================================



Am 12.04.2011 21:35, schrieb Bill Fenlason:

> Thomas, questions about the source release schedule have been asked
> here since 2008 or 2009.  None have been answered in substance.
>
> As you may recall, I suggested quite some time ago that a letter of
> inquiry should be sent to IBM legal, but everyone thought that was a
> bad idea.  If a major company announces an intention to do something
> and then fails to do it, they may be responsible for damages.  
> Certainly I'm not going to sue IBM because I spent a lot of time and
> effort based on their promise to open source NetRexx, but you can see
> why IBM is normally very careful about its public intentions.
>
> Last week I sent an email to a high level IBM manager who is very
> knowledgeable in the open source business.  I asked him to help in
> moving the process along, and I sent copies to the principles (V.
> Hein, Rene and MFC).  To date none of the four have responded.  
> Possibly they have decided to ignore me as well as the issue, but it
> has only been a few days and it is too soon to draw that conclusion.
>
> My next suggestion is that a public information campaign be carefully
> planned and started.  That would include such things as email and
> snail mail letters to IBM, all of the "open source community"
> organizations, the leading computer industry publications, news sites
> and blogs, and the major public discussion groups.  Did you know that
> Slashdot (Alexa global traffic rank 1323) gets 5.5 million hits per
> month?  Or that StackOverflow, Reddit and Digg have Alexa ranks better
> than 135?  (Google is 1, Facebook is 2).
>
> A public "open letter" to "The IBM Corporation" might actually be
> answered, particularly if the story went viral.  An amazing number of
> people have very strong feelings about open source.
>
> The basic question is: "It has been over three years.  When is IBM
> going to keep its promise to open source NetRexx?"
>
> Perhaps IBM will be responsive to some gentle public pressure.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On 4/12/2011 11:28 AM, Thomas Schneider wrote:
>> Hello there all,
>>
>>    since a couple of years (e.g. since MFC abandoned NetRexx Support,
>> and speaking has been about
>> opening it's source) NetRexx, as a matter of fact, is a FROZEN
>> product :-(
>>
>>    Whil'st I can live with that, I'm encountering a couple of
>> minor/major issues I would like to
>>
>> a) report to the proper parties.
>> b) get resolved before the next release.
>>
>> As some (most) of them do occur only with more hughe NetRexx
>> pplications (like mine),
>> I cannot report them properly, as I cannot attach the samples on
>> ibm-netrexx.
>>
>> As already said, I can live with it, but I do personally think time
>> has come that some
>> actions will be needed.
>>
>> Hence, my question:
>>
>> What is, nowaday, the realistic time-frame of the IBM NetRexx Open
>> Source release (when
>> it will happen at all) ?
>>
>> Could Rene and/or Mike give us all, please a guestimate (best
>> estimate), at least?
>>
>> As all of my software does now rely on NetRexx stability, I would
>> need an answer, please,
>> as most of us, to make our own proper schedules!
>>
>>
>> Thanks for any insight into this issue, in advance. :-)
>>
>> Thomas.
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

--
Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com)
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[billfen]

Thomas, I suggest that you read these articles - they clearly make the
point that if you want a scripting language to be popular and used, it
should be open.

http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/community-drives-scripting-adoption-569

http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/top-five-scripting-languages-the-jvm-855?page=0,0&r=271 
<http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/top-five-scripting-languages-the-jvm-855?page=0,0&r=271>

And in particular, check the paragraph on page 6 of the second article,
starting with the words: "Finally, NetRexx was the original scripting
language for the JVM".

I also want the language to be popular, but trying to popularize it
before it is open sourced is putting the cart before the horse.

Bill


On 4/12/2011 4:17 PM, Thomas Schneider wrote:

> Hi Bill,
>    I *do* currently have a totally other point than you:
>
> I'm in active negotiations with IBM Austria here in Vienna, as they do
> want to use my PP (The Program Porting Machine, see www.thsitc.com,
> company profile) by a couple of major Austrian companies...
>
> I'm just introducing them to the powers of IBM NetRexx.
>
> They didn't even know it (IBM NetRexx) , at all, as all this
> conversion/migration/porting Business is currently done using iBM
> Rational Rose products.
>
> As a matter of fact: They *are* now interested, but we (the
> ibm-netrexx community) must cme up as quick as possible with a
> functioning URL (I think, www.netrexx.org has been founded for this
> reason).
>
> When I will not get a valid reply with some realistic release days, I
> will do the following:
>
> -- Copy all references I do find, to www.thsitc.com, product ReyC
> -- use the fact, that IBM NetRexx is owned by IBM as a sales argument
> for my PP.
> --  and get some reference implementations here in Austria :-)
>
> .. As I did say to Mike Cowlishaw, years ago, when I did write Rexx2Nrx:
>
> NetRexx is the *best designed* Computer Language I've ever seen (and I
> do know and did use  a LOT of them, trust me ;-))
>
> I do, meanwhile, think, that open sourcing NetRexx is *NOT* as
> important than *spreading knowledge* of this marvelous language:
>
> -- by an OPEN USER GROUP
> -- by an ACTIVE user GROUP
> -- by quickly adapting to customer/user requirements.
>
> I do agree: That's my personal point of view.
>
> My personal attitude is to improve the 'ideas' and 'concepts' of
> NetRexx in Rey ;-)
>
> Thomas.
> =================================================================================================================
>
>
>
>
> Am 12.04.2011 21:35, schrieb Bill Fenlason:
>> Thomas, questions about the source release schedule have been asked
>> here since 2008 or 2009.  None have been answered in substance.
>>
>> As you may recall, I suggested quite some time ago that a letter of
>> inquiry should be sent to IBM legal, but everyone thought that was a
>> bad idea.  If a major company announces an intention to do something
>> and then fails to do it, they may be responsible for damages.  
>> Certainly I'm not going to sue IBM because I spent a lot of time and
>> effort based on their promise to open source NetRexx, but you can see
>> why IBM is normally very careful about its public intentions.
>>
>> Last week I sent an email to a high level IBM manager who is very
>> knowledgeable in the open source business.  I asked him to help in
>> moving the process along, and I sent copies to the principles (V.
>> Hein, Rene and MFC).  To date none of the four have responded.  
>> Possibly they have decided to ignore me as well as the issue, but it
>> has only been a few days and it is too soon to draw that conclusion.
>>
>> My next suggestion is that a public information campaign be carefully
>> planned and started.  That would include such things as email and
>> snail mail letters to IBM, all of the "open source community"
>> organizations, the leading computer industry publications, news sites
>> and blogs, and the major public discussion groups.  Did you know that
>> Slashdot (Alexa global traffic rank 1323) gets 5.5 million hits per
>> month?  Or that StackOverflow, Reddit and Digg have Alexa ranks
>> better than 135?  (Google is 1, Facebook is 2).
>>
>> A public "open letter" to "The IBM Corporation" might actually be
>> answered, particularly if the story went viral.  An amazing number of
>> people have very strong feelings about open source.
>>
>> The basic question is: "It has been over three years.  When is IBM
>> going to keep its promise to open source NetRexx?"
>>
>> Perhaps IBM will be responsive to some gentle public pressure.
>>
>> Bill
>>
>>
>> On 4/12/2011 11:28 AM, Thomas Schneider wrote:
>>> Hello there all,
>>>
>>>    since a couple of years (e.g. since MFC abandoned NetRexx
>>> Support, and speaking has been about
>>> opening it's source) NetRexx, as a matter of fact, is a FROZEN
>>> product :-(
>>>
>>>    Whil'st I can live with that, I'm encountering a couple of
>>> minor/major issues I would like to
>>>
>>> a) report to the proper parties.
>>> b) get resolved before the next release.
>>>
>>> As some (most) of them do occur only with more hughe NetRexx
>>> pplications (like mine),
>>> I cannot report them properly, as I cannot attach the samples on
>>> ibm-netrexx.
>>>
>>> As already said, I can live with it, but I do personally think time
>>> has come that some
>>> actions will be needed.
>>>
>>> Hence, my question:
>>>
>>> What is, nowaday, the realistic time-frame of the IBM NetRexx Open
>>> Source release (when
>>> it will happen at all) ?
>>>
>>> Could Rene and/or Mike give us all, please a guestimate (best
>>> estimate), at least?
>>>
>>> As all of my software does now rely on NetRexx stability, I would
>>> need an answer, please,
>>> as most of us, to make our own proper schedules!
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks for any insight into this issue, in advance. :-)
>>>
>>> Thomas.
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Fernando Cassia-2]

On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Thomas Schneider
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> I do, meanwhile, think, that open sourcing NetRexx is *NOT* as important
> than *spreading knowledge* of this marvelous language:
>
> -- by an OPEN USER GROUP
> -- by an ACTIVE user GROUP
> -- by quickly adapting to customer/user requirements.
>
> I do agree: That's my personal point of view.

Of COURSE you do NOT THINK open sourcing is important. You´re in the
business of negotiating a contract with IBM, Oracle, or any other
firm, to the highest bidder, to sell your *intellectual property* to
*THEM*.

But guess what, I´ve seen great products die because of neglect by the
parent company (CA-Realizer, IBM OS/2 comes to mind), so I´ve taken a
personal stance, I will NOT get involved in something that is NOT open
source and does NOT guarantee me that it will outlive its creator.

You insist on NOT open sourcing your ReyC (not even a basic version
supporting only Rexx and NetRexx), so I insist on NOT taking it
seriously.

"In the long run, we´re all dead" said that great British economist
John Maynard Keynes. And he was right.

So, I´d like something that I know can outlive its creator.

It´s no surprise that Regina Rexx is the most popular Rexx
implementation: it´s open source.

FC

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[ThSITC]

Hello Fernando,
    there IS a misunderstanding here....

I AM willing to OPEN SOURCE ReyC for classic Rexx, NetRexx, and ooRexx.

NO intent from my side to make MONEY out of the Rexx (any dialect) corner.

ReyC for any Rexx dialect should and *will be free* (and will be OPEN
SOURCED)
as soon as I can decypher a strategy & double Licence which will
allow&support
me to make money out of PP:  Porting huge PL/I and COBOL, and, very
soon, NATURAL
applications to IBM NetRexx.

My current problem is that all my Parsers are part of PP, and the
compiler itself.

And I cannot currently find a proper DOUBLE Licence for my needs!

I'm too old (and too young) to having understood how to make money
out of an OPEN SOURCE product :-(

Full stop, again,

Thomas.
====================================================================
Am 12.04.2011 23:10, schrieb Fernando Cassia:

> On Tue, Apr 12, 2011 at 5:17 PM, Thomas Schneider
> <[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> I do, meanwhile, think, that open sourcing NetRexx is *NOT* as important
>> than *spreading knowledge* of this marvelous language:
>>
>> -- by an OPEN USER GROUP
>> -- by an ACTIVE user GROUP
>> -- by quickly adapting to customer/user requirements.
>>
>> I do agree: That's my personal point of view.
> Of COURSE you do NOT THINK open sourcing is important. You´re in the
> business of negotiating a contract with IBM, Oracle, or any other
> firm, to the highest bidder, to sell your *intellectual property* to
> *THEM*.
>
> But guess what, I´ve seen great products die because of neglect by the
> parent company (CA-Realizer, IBM OS/2 comes to mind), so I´ve taken a
> personal stance, I will NOT get involved in something that is NOT open
> source and does NOT guarantee me that it will outlive its creator.
>
> You insist on NOT open sourcing your ReyC (not even a basic version
> supporting only Rexx and NetRexx), so I insist on NOT taking it
> seriously.
>
> "In the long run, we´re all dead" said that great British economist
> John Maynard Keynes. And he was right.
>
> So, I´d like something that I know can outlive its creator.
>
> It´s no surprise that Regina Rexx is the most popular Rexx
> implementation: it´s open source.
>
> FC
>

--
Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com)
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[ThSITC]

Hi Bill,
    I could make the *Rey* language, my personal extension to NetRexx,
open source.

... as soon as we all do agree that my additions to the NetRexx language
will be valuable for the
community.... :-)

OK?

What I'm reluctant is, to make PP: The Program Porting Machine, which
does translate COBOL and PL/I
to IBM NetRexx, open source, and others (than me) do make hughe money
out of this, my efforts.

I simply didn't yet find a system architecture to separate ReyC and PP
enough, as all of the code
has been developped by decade(s), and is mutually interweaved!

Thomas.
=================================================================================

Am 12.04.2011 22:50, schrieb Bill Fenlason:

> Thomas, I suggest that you read these articles - they clearly make the
> point that if you want a scripting language to be popular and used, it
> should be open.
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/community-drives-scripting-adoption-569 
>
>
> http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/top-five-scripting-languages-the-jvm-855?page=0,0&r=271 
> <http://www.infoworld.com/d/developer-world/top-five-scripting-languages-the-jvm-855?page=0,0&r=271>
>
>
> And in particular, check the paragraph on page 6 of the second
> article, starting with the words: "Finally, NetRexx was the original
> scripting language for the JVM".
>
> I also want the language to be popular, but trying to popularize it
> before it is open sourced is putting the cart before the horse.
>
> Bill
>
>
> On 4/12/2011 4:17 PM, Thomas Schneider wrote:
>> Hi Bill,
>>    I *do* currently have a totally other point than you:
>>
>> I'm in active negotiations with IBM Austria here in Vienna, as they
>> do want to use my PP (The Program Porting Machine, see www.thsitc.com,
>> company profile) by a couple of major Austrian companies...
>>
>> I'm just introducing them to the powers of IBM NetRexx.
>>
>> They didn't even know it (IBM NetRexx) , at all, as all this
>> conversion/migration/porting Business is currently done using iBM
>> Rational Rose products.
>>
>> As a matter of fact: They *are* now interested, but we (the
>> ibm-netrexx community) must cme up as quick as possible with a
>> functioning URL (I think, www.netrexx.org has been founded for this
>> reason).
>>
>> When I will not get a valid reply with some realistic release days, I
>> will do the following:
>>
>> -- Copy all references I do find, to www.thsitc.com, product ReyC
>> -- use the fact, that IBM NetRexx is owned by IBM as a sales argument
>> for my PP.
>> --  and get some reference implementations here in Austria :-)
>>
>> .. As I did say to Mike Cowlishaw, years ago, when I did write Rexx2Nrx:
>>
>> NetRexx is the *best designed* Computer Language I've ever seen (and
>> I do know and did use  a LOT of them, trust me ;-))
>>
>> I do, meanwhile, think, that open sourcing NetRexx is *NOT* as
>> important than *spreading knowledge* of this marvelous language:
>>
>> -- by an OPEN USER GROUP
>> -- by an ACTIVE user GROUP
>> -- by quickly adapting to customer/user requirements.
>>
>> I do agree: That's my personal point of view.
>>
>> My personal attitude is to improve the 'ideas' and 'concepts' of
>> NetRexx in Rey ;-)
>>
>> Thomas.
>> =================================================================================================================
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Am 12.04.2011 21:35, schrieb Bill Fenlason:
>>> Thomas, questions about the source release schedule have been asked
>>> here since 2008 or 2009.  None have been answered in substance.
>>>
>>> As you may recall, I suggested quite some time ago that a letter of
>>> inquiry should be sent to IBM legal, but everyone thought that was a
>>> bad idea.  If a major company announces an intention to do something
>>> and then fails to do it, they may be responsible for damages.  
>>> Certainly I'm not going to sue IBM because I spent a lot of time and
>>> effort based on their promise to open source NetRexx, but you can
>>> see why IBM is normally very careful about its public intentions.
>>>
>>> Last week I sent an email to a high level IBM manager who is very
>>> knowledgeable in the open source business.  I asked him to help in
>>> moving the process along, and I sent copies to the principles (V.
>>> Hein, Rene and MFC).  To date none of the four have responded.  
>>> Possibly they have decided to ignore me as well as the issue, but it
>>> has only been a few days and it is too soon to draw that conclusion.
>>>
>>> My next suggestion is that a public information campaign be
>>> carefully planned and started.  That would include such things as
>>> email and snail mail letters to IBM, all of the "open source
>>> community" organizations, the leading computer industry
>>> publications, news sites and blogs, and the major public discussion
>>> groups.  Did you know that Slashdot (Alexa global traffic rank 1323)
>>> gets 5.5 million hits per month?  Or that StackOverflow, Reddit and
>>> Digg have Alexa ranks better than 135?  (Google is 1, Facebook is 2).
>>>
>>> A public "open letter" to "The IBM Corporation" might actually be
>>> answered, particularly if the story went viral.  An amazing number
>>> of people have very strong feelings about open source.
>>>
>>> The basic question is: "It has been over three years.  When is IBM
>>> going to keep its promise to open source NetRexx?"
>>>
>>> Perhaps IBM will be responsive to some gentle public pressure.
>>>
>>> Bill
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/12/2011 11:28 AM, Thomas Schneider wrote:
>>>> Hello there all,
>>>>
>>>>    since a couple of years (e.g. since MFC abandoned NetRexx
>>>> Support, and speaking has been about
>>>> opening it's source) NetRexx, as a matter of fact, is a FROZEN
>>>> product :-(
>>>>
>>>>    Whil'st I can live with that, I'm encountering a couple of
>>>> minor/major issues I would like to
>>>>
>>>> a) report to the proper parties.
>>>> b) get resolved before the next release.
>>>>
>>>> As some (most) of them do occur only with more hughe NetRexx
>>>> pplications (like mine),
>>>> I cannot report them properly, as I cannot attach the samples on
>>>> ibm-netrexx.
>>>>
>>>> As already said, I can live with it, but I do personally think time
>>>> has come that some
>>>> actions will be needed.
>>>>
>>>> Hence, my question:
>>>>
>>>> What is, nowaday, the realistic time-frame of the IBM NetRexx Open
>>>> Source release (when
>>>> it will happen at all) ?
>>>>
>>>> Could Rene and/or Mike give us all, please a guestimate (best
>>>> estimate), at least?
>>>>
>>>> As all of my software does now rely on NetRexx stability, I would
>>>> need an answer, please,
>>>> as most of us, to make our own proper schedules!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for any insight into this issue, in advance. :-)
>>>>
>>>> Thomas.
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

--
Thomas Schneider (www.thsitc.com)
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]