ibm-netrexx

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Classic

List

Threaded

42 messages Options

123

David Requena

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for now... :-)

The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
actually advancing in some direction.
We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
eagerly awaiting for the
culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.

As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too) for
Mike's language processor and runtime
components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!

I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the topic
but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the outside,
RexxLA presents a public image in the
style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this topic
is up to its members, I have no stake at it.

OK, to the point: here're my questions:

1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
- Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
language?
- The intellectual property constituted by the language definition?
Maybe control over future direction of this?

2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may be
hindering the process?
- Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals willing
to support the language have to
re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open sourced?

3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language eveolution:
- Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage this?
- Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non RexxLA
members be able to get involved?
- Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found at
http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of them
though.

4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification already
been held?
- Any already taken decisions?

5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
- Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?

6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some little
influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
must for me! ;-))

Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some time
now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in my
view these would be valid questions were I an actual
present member of RexxLA.

Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at the
list has some insights into these matters.
Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!

Thanks in advance.
--
Saludos / Regards,
David Requena
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100205/94b7d6d0/attachment.html

David Requena

Re: Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Oh! and of course!

7) Any pointers on which kind of open source license has the IBM party in
mind for NetRexx?

That was initially my main question ;-)

2010/2/5 David Requena <[hidden email]>

>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for now... :-)
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
> actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
> eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too) for
> Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the topic
> but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the
> outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this
> topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
> language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language definition?
> Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may be
> hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals willing
> to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open
> sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
> eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non RexxLA
> members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found at
> http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of them
> though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification already
> been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some little
> influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some time
> now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in my
> view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at the
> list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
>

--
Saludos / Regards,
David Requena
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100205/d00d8103/attachment.html

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Re: Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Hello David Requena,

thank you so much for raising those issues, and forwarding the LINK
to Martin Lafaix' proposed
extension to NetRexx (below in your original mail)

I am finding a couple of points, especially relating assertions etc,
which are very similiar to my own thoughts (although I currently do use
another syntax than Martin is proposing, as I have NOT been aware up to
now of this document at all ... :-( ).

I will listen this discussion, and put in my input, when I did read
Martin's document in more detail.

Thomas Schneider (Tom.)
============================================================

David Requena schrieb:

>
> Oh! and of course!
>
> 7) Any pointers on which kind of open source license has the IBM party
> in mind for NetRexx?
>
> That was initially my main question ;-)
>
> 2010/2/5 David Requena <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for
> now... :-)
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process
> is actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance,
> are eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights
> too) for Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about
> the topic but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from
> the outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course
> this topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of
> the language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language
> definition? Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which
> may be hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will
> individuals willing to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be
> open sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
> eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to
> manage this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will
> non RexxLA members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those
> found at http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or
> all of them though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition
> modification already been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some
> little influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for
> some time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point
> is in my view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope
> someone at the list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
>
>
>
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

rvjansen

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by David Requena

Hi David,

those are a lot of questions, all perfectly valid - and it is late so I'll answer you as compact as possible.

The Ivory Tower council of savants impression actually made me laugh - if you would know them - us - you might not hand out compliments that easily. All people I know from RexxLA are quite the opposite - they will rewrite your code for you in the middle of the night just because it is Rexx and will visit the symposium just because they are friends.

The tight lippedness about this process has got nothing to do with RexxLA. I would encourage you to be a member, because it is - well - a fun group of people with a vast amount of knowledge about the granddaddy of scripting languages (not my words, I read that in "Programming Language Pragmatics") and/or the first alternative language for the JVM. And not expensive, at least not when you compare it to an iPhone. Or an Android phone (that actually runs NetRexx).

About 1) and 2), I can, in my ivory tower way, only say: the work is done. Do not worry about this.

3) Yes, a language council is being set up for this purpose. Non members will also be involved, but will not be elegible for the ballpoint pens and stickers.
4) We are postponing any discussion about future language modification until the time for it is ripe. I know Martin's proposals and I have a few of my own. To start one discussion, I abhor Java generics syntax but like what it does. Maybe NetRexx can do this without syntax. The important part is, all things should be discussed and agreed, then documented, then implemented. It is the Rexx way. My personal priority is in annotations.

5) No. I am open for suggestions, but I happen to like NetRexx. This is probably something members get to vote on if they think it has to change.

6) No, you will not need to become a member, but why don't you join anyway?

And this is 2010. Of course I am bound by several NDA's, one of them IBM, one of them the IBM account I work for, and several others I just signed because otherwise I cannot invoice people or get insurance. There is even one NDA, this is the truth, that I am not allowed to talk about. This should not have to keep us from having a fruitful discussion on language futures at all. It does explain however, the terseness of answers 1) and 2).

Let me finish by expressing my gratitude to you for the resurrection of an important NetRexx tool - let us not allow this list to go quiet again.

best regards,

Ren?.

On 5 feb 2010, at 00:00, David Requena wrote:

>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for now... :-)
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too) for Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the topic but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language definition? Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may be hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals willing to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non RexxLA members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found at http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of them though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification already been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some little influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in my view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at the list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100205/92ec3e2e/attachment.html

Kermit Kiser

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by David Requena

David ;

I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store
them all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your site?

-- Kermit

David Requena wrote:

>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for
> now... :-)
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
> actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
> eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too)
> for Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the
> topic but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the
> outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this
> topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
> language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language definition?
> Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may
> be hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals
> willing to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open
> sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
> eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage
> this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non
> RexxLA members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found
> at http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of
> them though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification
> already been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some
> little influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some
> time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in
> my view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at
> the list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100204/9180e5e5/attachment-0001.html

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Hi Kermit, David, & all,

I am currently in the process to buildup the new www.Rexx2Nrx.com homepage.

Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all those tools
available in a central
place ?

Tom.
=================================================================
Kermit Kiser schrieb:

> David ;
>
> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store
> them all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your site?
>
> -- Kermit
>
> David Requena wrote:
>>
>> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for
>> now... :-)
>>
>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
>> actually advancing in some direction.
>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
>> eagerly awaiting for the
>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>>
>> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too)
>> for Mike's language processor and runtime
>> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>>
>> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the
>> topic but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
>> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the
>> outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
>> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course
>> this topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>>
>> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>>
>> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
>> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
>> language?
>> - The intellectual property constituted by the language
>> definition? Maybe control over future direction of this?
>>
>> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may
>> be hindering the process?
>> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals
>> willing to support the language have to
>> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open
>> sourced?
>>
>> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
>> eveolution:
>> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage
>> this?
>> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non
>> RexxLA members be able to get involved?
>> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found
>> at http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
>> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all
>> of them though.
>>
>> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification
>> already been held?
>> - Any already taken decisions?
>>
>> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
>> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>>
>> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some
>> little influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
>> must for me! ;-))
>>
>> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for
>> some time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
>> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is
>> in my view these would be valid questions were I an actual
>> present member of RexxLA.
>>
>> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone
>> at the list has some insights into these matters.
>> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>> --
>> Saludos / Regards,
>> David Requena
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

David Requena

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Kermit Kiser

Kermit,

Yes, of course that's a great idea.

I wouldn't directly reproduce original content without prior permission
though. I think a directory of short summaries with http links to locations
of full original content on the net would be a very valuable resource
indeed. On the other hand this could become source of much productive future
discussion here at the list.

I'm busy at the moment with the movement of netrexx-misc to a new home but
will start working on this as soon as the move is complete.

In the mean time, a general plea for list members:

Could you please start forwarding to the list links to any known such RFE
content you're aware of? I'll be compiling a list as a first step.
Please note that links to content no longer available on the net are also
interesting. In the past the internet web archive has proven to be a
valuable tool for recovering such dead content (see the link to NrsDocx'
changelog I posted to the list few days ago).

2010/2/5 Kermit Kiser <[hidden email]>

> David ;
>
> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store them
> all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your site?
>
> -- Kermit
>
> David Requena wrote:
>
>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for now... :-)
>
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
> actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
> eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too) for
> Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the topic
> but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the
> outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this
> topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
> language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language definition?
> Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may be
> hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals willing
> to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open
> sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
> eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non RexxLA
> members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found at
> http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of them
> though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification
> already been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some little
> influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some
> time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in my
> view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at
> the list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing [hidden email]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>
>

David Requena

Re: Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Thomas.Schneider.Wien

I suppose most of us have at least crudely emulated assertions at some point
in time. Having language support for this basic tools would be very nice.
I particularly like the point on "parameter deconstruction". Not that sure
about constants and predicates...

2010/2/5 Thomas Schneider <[hidden email]>

> Hello David Requena,
>
> thank you so much for raising those issues, and forwarding the LINK to
> Martin Lafaix' proposed
> extension to NetRexx (below in your original mail)
>
> I am finding a couple of points, especially relating assertions etc, which
> are very similiar to my own thoughts (although I currently do use another
> syntax than Martin is proposing, as I have NOT been aware up to now of this
> document at all ... :-( ).
>
> I will listen this discussion, and put in my input, when I did read
> Martin's document in more detail.
>
> Thomas Schneider (Tom.)
> ============================================================
>
> David Requena schrieb:
>
>>
>> Oh! and of course!
>>
>> 7) Any pointers on which kind of open source license has the IBM party in
>> mind for NetRexx?
>>
>> That was initially my main question ;-)
>>
>> 2010/2/5 David Requena <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>
>>
>>
>> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for
>> now... :-)
>>
>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process
>> is actually advancing in some direction.
>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance,
>> are eagerly awaiting for the
>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>>
>> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights
>> too) for Mike's language processor and runtime
>> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>>
>> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about
>> the topic but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
>> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from
>> the outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
>> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course
>> this topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>>
>> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>>
>> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
>> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of
>> the language?
>> - The intellectual property constituted by the language
>> definition? Maybe control over future direction of this?
>>
>> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which
>> may be hindering the process?
>> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will
>> individuals willing to support the language have to
>> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be
>> open sourced?
>>
>> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
>> eveolution:
>> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to
>> manage this?
>> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will
>> non RexxLA members be able to get involved?
>> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those
>> found at http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
>> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or
>> all of them though.
>>
>> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition
>> modification already been held?
>> - Any already taken decisions?
>>
>> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
>> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>>
>> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some
>> little influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
>> must for me! ;-))
>>
>> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for
>> some time now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
>> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point
>> is in my view these would be valid questions were I an actual
>> present member of RexxLA.
>>
>> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope
>> someone at the list has some insights into these matters.
>> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>>
>> Thanks in advance.
>> -- Saludos / Regards,
>> David Requena
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Saludos / Regards,
>> David Requena
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Aviatrexx

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Tom,

I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of NetRexx
from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you, David, Kermit, and others
have demonstrated for this project, but I think we all need to slow down and
take a breath.

Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which motorcycle to
buy for him. :-)

I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some world-class
intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for starters), we have the
experience of having done the same process with ooRexx, and we have a passionate
(rabid?) group of NetRexx enthusiasts trying to wait for Christmas morning.

There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the NetRexx team
and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have a lot more questions
than you do, many of which are quite prosaic and unglamorous, but crucial to the
success of this project. We learned a lot from the ooRexx project and will
incorporate those lessons into the organization and charter of the NetRexx project.

At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by, so I hope
you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take comfort in the philosophy
to which all of us are committed, that being the fundamental tenets of The Rexx
Language, as laid out by Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said as much in his answer
to David's fourth question, when he referred to following The Rexx Way (my caps)
of Discuss, Agree, Document, then Implement.

Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it probably
means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.

I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code or doc
repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx code will be housed.
It will be much less confusing for users to have only one location to find
NetRexx resources, than a bookmark file full of broken or obsolete links.

IMHO, of course.

-Chip-

On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
> to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities (including mine)
> to www.NetRexx.org:
>
> What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
>
> When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so much
> satisfied
> with what I do have, and will need (please)
>
> your advise:
>
> How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org ??
>
> Your advise will be welcome ...

On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:

> I am currently in the process to buildup the new www.Rexx2Nrx.com homepage.
>
> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all those tools
> available in a central
> place ?
>
> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store
>> them all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your
>> site?
>>
>> David Requena wrote:
>>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
>>> actually advancing in some direction.
>>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
>>> eagerly awaiting for the
>>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.

David Requena

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by rvjansen

Thanks very very very much, Rene. Your inputs are awesome.
Please find further comments in-lined below.

2010/2/5 Ren? Jansen <[hidden email]>

> Hi David,
>
> The Ivory Tower council of savants impression actually made me laugh - if
> you would know them - us - you might not hand out compliments that easily.
> All people I know from RexxLA are quite the opposite - they will rewrite
> your code for you in the middle of the night just because it is Rexx and
> will visit the symposium just because they are friends.
>

Glad you took it with humor. As stated it wasn't intended as a critic :-)

>
> The tight lippedness about this process has got nothing to do with RexxLA.
>
I would encourage you to be a member, because it is - well - a fun group of
> people with a vast amount of knowledge about the granddaddy of scripting
> languages (not my words, I read that in "Programming Language Pragmatics")
> and/or the first alternative language for the JVM. And not expensive, at
> least not when you compare it to an iPhone.
>

That's right. As a matter of fact it's not a financial question even for me
having had to take a job earning 30% less that a the prior one recently!
Got the impression the RexxLA community has its roots at the mainframe/host
era, when IT community was much smaller than nowadays and
personal acquaintance was much more of a factor on building the community
itself. When I first had contact with computers it was on a CBM 64. This was
the 80s and client/server was the current IT fancy concept :-) Felt a little
shy joining in fact...

I'll be joining anyway now that some big events seem to be looming in the
horizont

Or an Android phone (that actually runs NetRexx).
>
>
Further comment on this on a separate email.

> About 1) and 2), I can, in my ivory tower way, only say: the work is done.
> Do not worry about this.
>
> 3) Yes, a language council is being set up for this purpose. Non members
> will also be involved, but will not be elegible for the ballpoint pens and
> stickers.
>

You've stickers there? really? You should have stated so to start with!!!

> 4) We are postponing any discussion about future language modification
> until the time for it is ripe. I know Martin's proposals and I have a few of
> my own. To start one discussion, I abhor Java generics syntax but like what
> it does. Maybe NetRexx can do this without syntax. The important part is,
> all things should be discussed and agreed, then documented, then
> implemented. It is the Rexx way. My personal priority is in annotations.
>
>
That's totally understandable. Most of today's open source projects suffer
from an stagnating lack of proper documentation and/or proper design
rationale. "Looking at the sources" is useful to hack your way at times but
helps nothing when you're designing your own systems.

By the way, I never liked java's implementation of generics (nor c++
templates for that matter) but at the end of the day, you know what? I've
much better things to do with my life than spending days casting rabits out
of hats (Rabit myHatVector.firstElement).jump() or facing exceptions about
Object not having a jump() method. You see, we do agree.

> 5) No. I am open for suggestions, but I happen to like NetRexx. This is
> probably something members get to vote on if they think it has to change.
>

By that time I'll be there supporting the no-name-change-ever party. I see
no point to prepend "open" to anything when there is no corresponding
"closed" analogue in existence. Additionally, due to overuse, the term
"open" already lost nearly any meaning and virtually all of its coolness
factor.

> And this is 2010. Of course I am bound by several NDA's, one of them IBM,
> one of them the IBM account I work for, and several others I just signed
> because otherwise I cannot invoice people or get insurance. There is even
> one NDA, this is the truth, that I am not allowed to talk about. This should
> not have to keep us from having a fruitful discussion on language futures at
> all. It does explain however, the terseness of answers 1) and 2).
>

wow, that was a hell of a convoluted answer!
Point taken. Anyway, the NDA reference was my admittedly-non-direct way of
conveying my understanding should no answer come back :-)

Many thanks for this info bits. I realize now most of my previous concerns
were simply a consequence of not frankly asking the right questions.

Best regards,
David

On 5 feb 2010, at 00:00, David Requena wrote:

>
>
> No it's not about schedules this time around. Enough of that for now... :-)
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
> actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
> eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>
> As far as I know, IBM is handing the code (presumably the rights too) for
> Mike's language processor and runtime
> components to RexxLA and... and... and... well... that's it!
>
> I'm sure extensive discussion has been held within RexxLA about the topic
> but, being RexxLa how it is in its nature
> no word came out. No offence intended, it's just that seen from the
> outside, RexxLA presents a public image in the
> style of a council of the savants in their ivory tower. Of course this
> topic is up to its members, I have no stake at it.
>
> OK, to the point: here're my questions:
>
> 1) What is actually involved in the transfer process?
> - Just the code and rights for a particular implementation of the
> language?
> - The intellectual property constituted by the language definition?
> Maybe control over future direction of this?
>
> 2) Are there some actual software patents belonging to IBM which may be
> hindering the process?
> - Will the 'transferred product' be complete or will individuals willing
> to support the language have to
> re-implement some components which 'couldn't' finally be open
> sourced?
>
> 3) In case of RexxLA gaining actual control over future language
> eveolution:
> - Have the RexxLa board already made any plans about how to manage this?
> - Will all discussion be made within the organization or will non RexxLA
> members be able to get involved?
> - Will RexxLA accept outside proposals as for example those found at
> http://lafaix.online.fr/netrexx/WD-miscproposals.html
> by Martin Lafaix. Not saying I necessarily support any or all of them
> though.
>
> 4) Has any discussion about actual language definition modification already
> been held?
> - Any already taken decisions?
>
> 5) Has any discusion over the name of the language been held?
> - Will we have an oNetRexx in the vein of ooREXX?
>
> 6) All in all, will I *need* to join RexxLA in order to have some little
> influence over the future of NetRexx? Yes, generics are a
> must for me! ;-))
>
> Not to be misunderstood, I've been considering joining RexxLa for some time
> now for totally unrelated reasons. It's has been
> that kind of thing you're always going to do next day. The point is in my
> view these would be valid questions were I an actual
> present member of RexxLA.
>
> Just some doubt itching the back of my skull lately. I hope someone at the
> list has some insights into these matters.
> Also hope that individuals are not bound by an NDA!
>
> Thanks in advance.
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>
>

David Requena

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Aviatrexx

Chip,

Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple
slight precisions though.

First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:

- Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will be
obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
- Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx language
users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark file full of
broken or obsolete links" right now.

I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time. We, as
the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a consolidation of
the current array of dispersed (and rapidly vanishing into oblivion) of
netrexx resources on the net.

Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a direct
role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean it may have
an important influence on that language's ultimate fate. Any effort made to
help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user community is just another brick
thrown at the foundation of the tower (pun intended ;-) ) we all are trying
to build. That would be "the current times way"...

2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email]>

> Tom,
>
> I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of
> NetRexx from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you, David,
> Kermit, and others have demonstrated for this project, but I think we all
> need to slow down and take a breath.
>
> Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which motorcycle
> to buy for him. :-)
>
> I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some world-class
> intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for starters), we have
> the experience of having done the same process with ooRexx, and we have a
> passionate (rabid?) group of NetRexx enthusiasts trying to wait for
> Christmas morning.
>
> There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the NetRexx
> team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have a lot more
> questions than you do, many of which are quite prosaic and unglamorous, but
> crucial to the success of this project. We learned a lot from the ooRexx
> project and will incorporate those lessons into the organization and charter
> of the NetRexx project.
>
> At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by, so I
> hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take comfort in the
> philosophy to which all of us are committed, that being the fundamental
> tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid out by Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said
> as much in his answer to David's fourth question, when he referred to
> following The Rexx Way (my caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then
> Implement.
>
> Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it probably
> means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
>
> I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code or doc
> repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx code will be
> housed. It will be much less confusing for users to have only one location
> to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark file full of broken or obsolete
> links.
>
> IMHO, of course.
>
> -Chip-
>
> On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
> > to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities (including
> mine)
> > to www.NetRexx.org:
> >
> > What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
> >
> > When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so much
> > satisfied
> > with what I do have, and will need (please)
> >
> > your advise:
> >
> > How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org ??
> >
> > Your advise will be welcome ...
>
>
> On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:
>
>> I am currently in the process to buildup the new www.Rexx2Nrx.comhomepage.
>>
>> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all those tools
>> available in a central
>> place ?
>>
>> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>>
>>> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store them
>>> all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your site?
>>>
>>> David Requena wrote:
>>>
>>>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
>>>> actually advancing in some direction.
>>>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
>>>> eagerly awaiting for the
>>>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.
>>>>
>>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Michael Dag

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

David,
yes second point would be great, I came originally from VM EXEC2 and then
REXX onto REXXSAA on OS/2 before after a long time
falling for NetRexx, somehow other languages are not suitable for my brain
... and certainly C and Java are complete roadblocks,
I have gotten around with VB a little but only because of the syntax
prompting in the editor and a lot of trying...
so some decent samples on how to use some of the java stuff from NetRexx
would certainly help me a lot!!!

Although it's not making me a lot of money I do have 2 commercial products
out there that use NetRexx!

I am not planning on leaving NetRexx anytime soon, but if I can do more with
it then I can today, I would certainly like to find out.

Michael Dag
<http://www.mqsystems.com> www.mqsystems.com

_____

From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of David Requena
Sent: vrijdag 5 februari 2010 13:58
To: IBM Netrexx
Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Chip,

Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple slight
precisions though.

First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:

- Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will be
obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
- Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx language
users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark file full of
broken or obsolete links" right now.

I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time. We, as
the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a consolidation of
the current array of dispersed (and rapidly vanishing into oblivion) of
netrexx resources on the net.

Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a direct
role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean it may have
an important influence on that language's ultimate fate. Any effort made to
help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user community is just another brick
thrown at the foundation of the tower (pun intended ;-) ) we all are trying
to build. That would be "the current times way"...

2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email]>

Tom,

I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of NetRexx
from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you, David, Kermit, and
others have demonstrated for this project, but I think we all need to slow
down and take a breath.

Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which motorcycle
to buy for him. :-)

I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some world-class
intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for starters), we have
the experience of having done the same process with ooRexx, and we have a
passionate (rabid?) group of NetRexx enthusiasts trying to wait for
Christmas morning.

There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the NetRexx
team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have a lot more
questions than you do, many of which are quite prosaic and unglamorous, but
crucial to the success of this project. We learned a lot from the ooRexx
project and will incorporate those lessons into the organization and charter
of the NetRexx project.

At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by, so I
hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take comfort in the
philosophy to which all of us are committed, that being the fundamental
tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid out by Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said
as much in his answer to David's fourth question, when he referred to
following The Rexx Way (my caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then
Implement.

Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it probably
means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.

I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code or doc
repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx code will be
housed. It will be much less confusing for users to have only one location
to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark file full of broken or obsolete
links.

IMHO, of course.

-Chip-

On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
> to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities (including
mine)

> to www.NetRexx.org:
>
> What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
>
> When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so much
> satisfied
> with what I do have, and will need (please)
>
> your advise:
>
> How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org ??
>
> Your advise will be welcome ...

On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:

I am currently in the process to buildup the new www.Rexx2Nrx.com homepage.

Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all those tools
available in a central
place ?

Kermit Kiser schrieb:

I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place to store them
all or discuss them. Could you do something like that with your site?

David Requena wrote:

The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling this process is
actually advancing in some direction.
We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language advance, are
eagerly awaiting for the
culmination of a process about which we have near to no information.

_______________________________________________
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/20100205/09916cf2/attachment-0001.html

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Michael, did you ever try 'Rexx2Nrx' (see www.Rexx2Nrx.com) ?
Tom.
=============================================
Michael Dag schrieb:

> David,
> yes second point would be great, I came originally from VM EXEC2 and
> then REXX onto REXXSAA on OS/2 before after a long time
> falling for NetRexx, somehow other languages are not suitable for my
> brain ... and certainly C and Java are complete roadblocks,
> I have gotten around with VB a little but only because of the syntax
> prompting in the editor and a lot of trying...
> so some decent samples on how to use some of the java stuff
> from NetRexx would certainly help me a lot!!!
>
> Although it's not making me a lot of money I do have 2 commercial
> products out there that use NetRexx!
>
> I am not planning on leaving NetRexx anytime soon, but if I can do
> more with it then I can today, I would certainly like to find out.
>
> Michael Dag
> www.mqsystems.com <http://www.mqsystems.com>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] *On Behalf Of *David Requena
> *Sent:* vrijdag 5 februari 2010 13:58
> *To:* IBM Netrexx
> *Subject:* Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing
> process
>
> Chip,
>
> Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple
> slight precisions though.
>
> First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:
>
> - Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will be
> obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
> - Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx
> language users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark
> file full of broken or obsolete links" right now.
>
> I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time. We,
> as the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a
> consolidation of the current array of dispersed (and rapidly vanishing
> into oblivion) of netrexx resources on the net.
>
> Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a
> direct role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean
> it may have an important influence on that language's ultimate fate.
> Any effort made to help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user community
> is just another brick thrown at the foundation of the tower (pun
> intended ;-) ) we all are trying to build. That would be "the current
> times way"...
>
>
> 2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
> Tom,
>
> I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer
> of NetRexx from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you,
> David, Kermit, and others have demonstrated for this project, but
> I think we all need to slow down and take a breath.
>
> Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which
> motorcycle to buy for him. :-)
>
> I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some
> world-class intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike,
> for starters), we have the experience of having done the same
> process with ooRexx, and we have a passionate (rabid?) group of
> NetRexx enthusiasts trying to wait for Christmas morning.
>
> There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the
> NetRexx team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we
> have a lot more questions than you do, many of which are quite
> prosaic and unglamorous, but crucial to the success of this
> project. We learned a lot from the ooRexx project and will
> incorporate those lessons into the organization and charter of the
> NetRexx project.
>
> At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come
> by, so I hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will
> take comfort in the philosophy to which all of us are committed,
> that being the fundamental tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid
> out by Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said as much in his answer to
> David's fourth question, when he referred to following The Rexx
> Way (my caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then Implement.
>
> Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it
> probably means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
>
> I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code
> or doc repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx
> code will be housed. It will be much less confusing for users to
> have only one location to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark
> file full of broken or obsolete links.
>
> IMHO, of course.
>
> -Chip-
>
> On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
> > to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities
> (including mine)
> > to www.NetRexx.org <http://www.NetRexx.org>:
> >
> > What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
> >
> > When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so much
> > satisfied
> > with what I do have, and will need (please)
> >
> > your advise:
> >
> > How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org
> <http://www.NetRexx.org> ??
> >
> > Your advise will be welcome ...
>
>
> On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:
>
> I am currently in the process to buildup the new
> www.Rexx2Nrx.com <http://www.Rexx2Nrx.com> homepage.
>
> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all
> those tools available in a central
> place ?
>
> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>
> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe
> place to store them all or discuss them. Could you do
> something like that with your site?
>
> David Requena wrote:
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling
> this process is actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the
> language advance, are eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to
> no information.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

Aviatrexx

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by David Requena

Thank you for that clarification, David. I agree that it is crucial to a
productive discussion to establish exactly what we are talking about. :-)

Let me first establish that I do not speak for the Open Source NetRexx Project,
nor in any official capacity for the RexxLA. _I_ have not signed any NDAs, and
am privy to no more than anyone else on this discussion list. I speak from
experience, and My Humble Opinions are exactly that. But I took the Rexx Red
Pill a long time ago.

If I may paraphrase, you have made a distinction between "NetRexx the Language"
and "NetRexx the Community". IMHO, if NetRexx is to succeed, we need to do
everything in our power to erase that distinction and avoid creating any
mechanism that would tend to draw such a distinction. That is not only the
"Rexx Way", that's the "FOSS Way".

In my experience, a single point of contact (especially for nascent efforts like
FOSS NetRexx) is absolutely critical to wider visibility and acceptance. This
was the primary raison d'?tre for the creation of RexxLA in the first place.
There were many, many sites, vendors, and disassociated users of Rexx, on many
different platforms, who needed a single place to go for information, help,
news, etc.

Sure, there was comp.lang.rexx but it had become obvious by the late Eighties
that, due to the "open" nature of newsgroups, its signal-to-noise ratio had
dropped almost to the point of unintelligibility. Sadly, things have not gotten
significantly better in the intervening twenty years and I don't expect them to,
when the cost to participate is so low. One sees the exact same phenomenon when
attending a symphony concert in the park, versus the hall. Same symphony,
substantially different audience behavior, considerably poorer musical experience.

In short, I see no advantage, and many pitfalls in making a distinction between
"that which is RexxLA" and "that which is the NetRexx Community". RexxLA is
merely the umbrella organization with a legal name and address and incorporation
papers that can be responsible for the resources that IBM is willing to convey.

As for technical issues regarding where certain files should be maintained, or
which server should host which discussion group, or other such minor details, I
see no reason why the model (if not the specifics) used in the ooRexx Project
would not be a good place to start. (I will admit that I'm not a big fan of
SourceForge any more, but that itself is a technical detail.)

In closing, I'd like to address the subtle yet pervasive idea implicit in your
"ivory tower" references. In the "Cathedral and Bazaar" model, the NetRexx
Project is most decidedly _not_ a cathedral, nor a tower (of whatever material).

NetRexx has always been product of a single, extraordinarily talented Craftsman
working at his shop in the bazaar, building tools for us peasants and giving
them away for free. During the week, he is indeed a "Toolmaker to the King" but
on weekends he's in the bazaar working for free. However, the King always makes
the rules and, while willing to release the rights to one of the Craftsman's
tools, the Royal Lawyers must be appeased. Thus, and very temporarily, the
King's henchmen are guarding the Craftsman's door while an inventory is taken.
They will be gone very soon and the sun will again stream into the Craftsman's
shoppe.

It is RexxLA's best interest, no to mention a legal requirement, that it support
NetRexx in the Open Source Way.

-Chip-

On 2/5/10 12:57 David Requena said:

> Chip,
>
> Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple
> slight precisions though.
>
> First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:
>
> - Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will be
> obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
> - Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx language
> users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark file full of
> broken or obsolete links" right now.
>
> I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time. We,
> as the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a
> consolidation of the current array of dispersed (and rapidly vanishing
> into oblivion) of netrexx resources on the net.
>
> Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a
> direct role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean it
> may have an important influence on that language's ultimate fate. Any
> effort made to help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user community is
> just another brick thrown at the foundation of the tower (pun intended
> ;-) ) we all are trying to build. That would be "the current times way"...
>
>
> 2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>
> Tom,
>
> I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of
> NetRexx from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you,
> David, Kermit, and others have demonstrated for this project, but I
> think we all need to slow down and take a breath.
>
> Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which
> motorcycle to buy for him. :-)
>
> I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some
> world-class intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for
> starters), we have the experience of having done the same process
> with ooRexx, and we have a passionate (rabid?) group of NetRexx
> enthusiasts trying to wait for Christmas morning.
>
> There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the
> NetRexx team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have
> a lot more questions than you do, many of which are quite prosaic
> and unglamorous, but crucial to the success of this project. We
> learned a lot from the ooRexx project and will incorporate those
> lessons into the organization and charter of the NetRexx project.
>
> At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by,
> so I hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take
> comfort in the philosophy to which all of us are committed, that
> being the fundamental tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid out by
> Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said as much in his answer to David's
> fourth question, when he referred to following The Rexx Way (my
> caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then Implement.
>
> Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it
> probably means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
>
> I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code
> or doc repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx
> code will be housed. It will be much less confusing for users to
> have only one location to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark
> file full of broken or obsolete links.
>
> IMHO, of course.
>
> -Chip-
>
> On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
> > to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities
> (including mine)
> > to www.NetRexx.org <http://www.NetRexx.org>:
> >
> > What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
> >
> > When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so much
> > satisfied
> > with what I do have, and will need (please)
> >
> > your advise:
> >
> > How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org
> <http://www.NetRexx.org> ??
> >
> > Your advise will be welcome ...
>
>
> On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:
>
> I am currently in the process to buildup the new
> www.Rexx2Nrx.com <http://www.Rexx2Nrx.com> homepage.
>
> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all
> those tools available in a central
> place ?
>
> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>
> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place
> to store them all or discuss them. Could you do something
> like that with your site?
>
> David Requena wrote:
>
> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling
> this process is actually advancing in some direction.
> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language
> advance, are eagerly awaiting for the
> culmination of a process about which we have near to no
> information.
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Saludos / Regards,
> David Requena
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Hello Chip,
could you explain the meaning of the acronyms NDA and FOSS to me
*poor* Austrian Guy, please ? ;-)
I do not understand those terms.
Thanks in advance,
Tom.
=================================================================
Chip Davis schrieb:

> Thank you for that clarification, David. I agree that it is crucial
> to a productive discussion to establish exactly what we are talking
> about. :-)
>
> Let me first establish that I do not speak for the Open Source NetRexx
> Project, nor in any official capacity for the RexxLA. _I_ have not
> signed any NDAs, and am privy to no more than anyone else on this
> discussion list. I speak from experience, and My Humble Opinions are
> exactly that. But I took the Rexx Red Pill a long time ago.
>
> If I may paraphrase, you have made a distinction between "NetRexx the
> Language" and "NetRexx the Community". IMHO, if NetRexx is to
> succeed, we need to do everything in our power to erase that
> distinction and avoid creating any mechanism that would tend to draw
> such a distinction. That is not only the "Rexx Way", that's the "FOSS
> Way".
>
> In my experience, a single point of contact (especially for nascent
> efforts like FOSS NetRexx) is absolutely critical to wider visibility
> and acceptance. This was the primary raison d'?tre for the creation
> of RexxLA in the first place.
> There were many, many sites, vendors, and disassociated users of Rexx,
> on many different platforms, who needed a single place to go for
> information, help, news, etc.
>
> Sure, there was comp.lang.rexx but it had become obvious by the late
> Eighties that, due to the "open" nature of newsgroups, its
> signal-to-noise ratio had dropped almost to the point of
> unintelligibility. Sadly, things have not gotten significantly better
> in the intervening twenty years and I don't expect them to, when the
> cost to participate is so low. One sees the exact same phenomenon
> when attending a symphony concert in the park, versus the hall. Same
> symphony, substantially different audience behavior, considerably
> poorer musical experience.
>
> In short, I see no advantage, and many pitfalls in making a
> distinction between "that which is RexxLA" and "that which is the
> NetRexx Community". RexxLA is merely the umbrella organization with a
> legal name and address and incorporation papers that can be
> responsible for the resources that IBM is willing to convey.
>
> As for technical issues regarding where certain files should be
> maintained, or which server should host which discussion group, or
> other such minor details, I see no reason why the model (if not the
> specifics) used in the ooRexx Project would not be a good place to
> start. (I will admit that I'm not a big fan of SourceForge any more,
> but that itself is a technical detail.)
>
> In closing, I'd like to address the subtle yet pervasive idea implicit
> in your "ivory tower" references. In the "Cathedral and Bazaar"
> model, the NetRexx Project is most decidedly _not_ a cathedral, nor a
> tower (of whatever material).
>
> NetRexx has always been product of a single, extraordinarily talented
> Craftsman working at his shop in the bazaar, building tools for us
> peasants and giving them away for free. During the week, he is indeed
> a "Toolmaker to the King" but on weekends he's in the bazaar working
> for free. However, the King always makes the rules and, while willing
> to release the rights to one of the Craftsman's tools, the Royal
> Lawyers must be appeased. Thus, and very temporarily, the King's
> henchmen are guarding the Craftsman's door while an inventory is
> taken. They will be gone very soon and the sun will again stream into
> the Craftsman's shoppe.
>
> It is RexxLA's best interest, no to mention a legal requirement, that
> it support NetRexx in the Open Source Way.
>
> -Chip-
>
> On 2/5/10 12:57 David Requena said:
>> Chip,
>>
>> Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple
>> slight precisions though.
>>
>> First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:
>>
>> - Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will
>> be obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
>> - Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx
>> language users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark
>> file full of broken or obsolete links" right now.
>>
>> I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time.
>> We, as the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a
>> consolidation of the current array of dispersed (and rapidly
>> vanishing into oblivion) of netrexx resources on the net.
>>
>> Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a
>> direct role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean
>> it may have an important influence on that language's ultimate fate.
>> Any effort made to help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user
>> community is just another brick thrown at the foundation of the tower
>> (pun intended ;-) ) we all are trying to build. That would be "the
>> current times way"...
>>
>>
>> 2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>
>> Tom,
>>
>> I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of
>> NetRexx from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you,
>> David, Kermit, and others have demonstrated for this project, but I
>> think we all need to slow down and take a breath.
>>
>> Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which
>> motorcycle to buy for him. :-)
>>
>> I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some
>> world-class intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for
>> starters), we have the experience of having done the same process
>> with ooRexx, and we have a passionate (rabid?) group of NetRexx
>> enthusiasts trying to wait for Christmas morning.
>>
>> There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the
>> NetRexx team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have
>> a lot more questions than you do, many of which are quite prosaic
>> and unglamorous, but crucial to the success of this project. We
>> learned a lot from the ooRexx project and will incorporate those
>> lessons into the organization and charter of the NetRexx project.
>>
>> At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by,
>> so I hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take
>> comfort in the philosophy to which all of us are committed, that
>> being the fundamental tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid out by
>> Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said as much in his answer to David's
>> fourth question, when he referred to following The Rexx Way (my
>> caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then Implement.
>>
>> Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it
>> probably means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
>>
>> I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code
>> or doc repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx
>> code will be housed. It will be much less confusing for users to
>> have only one location to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark
>> file full of broken or obsolete links.
>>
>> IMHO, of course.
>>
>> -Chip-
>>
>> On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
>> > to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities
>> (including mine)
>> > to www.NetRexx.org <http://www.NetRexx.org>:
>> >
>> > What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
>> >
>> > When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so
>> much
>> > satisfied
>> > with what I do have, and will need (please)
>> >
>> > your advise:
>> >
>> > How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org
>> <http://www.NetRexx.org> ??
>> >
>> > Your advise will be welcome ...
>>
>>
>> On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:
>>
>> I am currently in the process to buildup the new
>> www.Rexx2Nrx.com <http://www.Rexx2Nrx.com> homepage.
>>
>> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all
>> those tools available in a central
>> place ?
>>
>> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>>
>> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place
>> to store them all or discuss them. Could you do something
>> like that with your site?
>>
>> David Requena wrote:
>>
>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling
>> this process is actually advancing in some direction.
>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language
>> advance, are eagerly awaiting for the
>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no
>> information.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Saludos / Regards,
>> David Requena
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

dsgoen

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

NDA = Non-Disclosure Agreement. This means that you won't tell anyone what
you learn (including your spouse) under pain of legal suits being brought
against you.

FOSS: Free and Open Software. The opposite of NDA!

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Thomas Schneider
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:30 PM
To: IBM Netrexx
Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

Hello Chip,
could you explain the meaning of the acronyms NDA and FOSS to me
*poor* Austrian Guy, please ? ;-)
I do not understand those terms.
Thanks in advance,
Tom.
=================================================================
Chip Davis schrieb:

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

Aviatrexx

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Thomas.Schneider.Wien

NDA = Non-Disclosure Agreement
FOSS = Free and Open Source Software

On 2/5/10 20:30 Thomas Schneider said:
> Hello Chip,
> could you explain the meaning of the acronyms NDA and FOSS to me
> *poor* Austrian Guy, please ? ;-)

Rupp Peter - prupp

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

I have no experience moving products into the open-source world, so I
was wondering how much assistance from Mike Cowlishaw will occur, or
will he still be involved in the process and/or post-move involvement?
I'm assuming whoever makes modifications or enhancements to the language
would require extensive knowledge of language processors, and be
intimately familiar with Mike's Rexx philosophies? That might be a
tough act to follow :-).

P.

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Chip Davis
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:58 PM
To: IBM Netrexx
Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing
process

NDA = Non-Disclosure Agreement
FOSS = Free and Open Source Software

On 2/5/10 20:30 Thomas Schneider said:
> Hello Chip,
> could you explain the meaning of the acronyms NDA and FOSS to me
> *poor* Austrian Guy, please ? ;-)

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

***************************************************************************
The information contained in this communication is confidential, is
intended only for the use of the recipient named above, and may be legally
privileged.

If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
communication is strictly prohibited.

If you have received this communication in error, please resend this
communication to the sender and delete the original message or any copy
of it from your computer system.

Thank You.
****************************************************************************

Thomas.Schneider.Wien

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by dsgoen

Ok, thanks. Unfortunately, I currently have NO NDA's pending (I'm in
pension already), but seeking like a fool to get some money in (as my
pension is rather low....)

And, Rexx2Nrx goes FOSS!
Tom.
======================================================================
David Scott Goen schrieb:

> NDA = Non-Disclosure Agreement. This means that you won't tell anyone what
> you learn (including your spouse) under pain of legal suits being brought
> against you.
>
> FOSS: Free and Open Software. The opposite of NDA!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email]
> [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Thomas Schneider
> Sent: Friday, February 05, 2010 2:30 PM
> To: IBM Netrexx
> Subject: Re: [Ibm-netrexx] Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process
>
> Hello Chip,
> could you explain the meaning of the acronyms NDA and FOSS to me
> *poor* Austrian Guy, please ? ;-)
> I do not understand those terms.
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom.
> =================================================================
> Chip Davis schrieb:
>
>> Thank you for that clarification, David. I agree that it is crucial
>> to a productive discussion to establish exactly what we are talking
>> about. :-)
>>
>> Let me first establish that I do not speak for the Open Source NetRexx
>> Project, nor in any official capacity for the RexxLA. _I_ have not
>> signed any NDAs, and am privy to no more than anyone else on this
>> discussion list. I speak from experience, and My Humble Opinions are
>> exactly that. But I took the Rexx Red Pill a long time ago.
>>
>> If I may paraphrase, you have made a distinction between "NetRexx the
>> Language" and "NetRexx the Community". IMHO, if NetRexx is to
>> succeed, we need to do everything in our power to erase that
>> distinction and avoid creating any mechanism that would tend to draw
>> such a distinction. That is not only the "Rexx Way", that's the "FOSS
>> Way".
>>
>> In my experience, a single point of contact (especially for nascent
>> efforts like FOSS NetRexx) is absolutely critical to wider visibility
>> and acceptance. This was the primary raison d'?tre for the creation
>> of RexxLA in the first place.
>> There were many, many sites, vendors, and disassociated users of Rexx,
>> on many different platforms, who needed a single place to go for
>> information, help, news, etc.
>>
>> Sure, there was comp.lang.rexx but it had become obvious by the late
>> Eighties that, due to the "open" nature of newsgroups, its
>> signal-to-noise ratio had dropped almost to the point of
>> unintelligibility. Sadly, things have not gotten significantly better
>> in the intervening twenty years and I don't expect them to, when the
>> cost to participate is so low. One sees the exact same phenomenon
>> when attending a symphony concert in the park, versus the hall. Same
>> symphony, substantially different audience behavior, considerably
>> poorer musical experience.
>>
>> In short, I see no advantage, and many pitfalls in making a
>> distinction between "that which is RexxLA" and "that which is the
>> NetRexx Community". RexxLA is merely the umbrella organization with a
>> legal name and address and incorporation papers that can be
>> responsible for the resources that IBM is willing to convey.
>>
>> As for technical issues regarding where certain files should be
>> maintained, or which server should host which discussion group, or
>> other such minor details, I see no reason why the model (if not the
>> specifics) used in the ooRexx Project would not be a good place to
>> start. (I will admit that I'm not a big fan of SourceForge any more,
>> but that itself is a technical detail.)
>>
>> In closing, I'd like to address the subtle yet pervasive idea implicit
>> in your "ivory tower" references. In the "Cathedral and Bazaar"
>> model, the NetRexx Project is most decidedly _not_ a cathedral, nor a
>> tower (of whatever material).
>>
>> NetRexx has always been product of a single, extraordinarily talented
>> Craftsman working at his shop in the bazaar, building tools for us
>> peasants and giving them away for free. During the week, he is indeed
>> a "Toolmaker to the King" but on weekends he's in the bazaar working
>> for free. However, the King always makes the rules and, while willing
>> to release the rights to one of the Craftsman's tools, the Royal
>> Lawyers must be appeased. Thus, and very temporarily, the King's
>> henchmen are guarding the Craftsman's door while an inventory is
>> taken. They will be gone very soon and the sun will again stream into
>> the Craftsman's shoppe.
>>
>> It is RexxLA's best interest, no to mention a legal requirement, that
>> it support NetRexx in the Open Source Way.
>>
>> -Chip-
>>
>> On 2/5/10 12:57 David Requena said:
>>
>>> Chip,
>>>
>>> Yours is more or less my own point. I'd like to express a couple
>>> slight precisions though.
>>>
>>> First, I believe where mixing 2 very distinct concepts here:
>>>
>>> - Open source NetRexx. This is RexxLA's concern and I think it will
>>> be obviously benefiting from "the REXX way".
>>> - Open source NetRexx user code/resources. This is the NetRexx
>>> language users community concern and is benefiting from "a bookmark
>>> file full of broken or obsolete links" right now.
>>>
>>> I for one have been talking about the second point the whole time.
>>> We, as the user base of the language, would greatly benefit from a
>>> consolidation of the current array of dispersed (and rapidly
>>> vanishing into oblivion) of netrexx resources on the net.
>>>
>>> Second, just because a given language's user community doesn't has a
>>> direct role in the language design, implementation, etc. doesn't mean
>>> it may have an important influence on that language's ultimate fate.
>>> Any effort made to help growing a strong, enthusiastic, user
>>> community is just another brick thrown at the foundation of the tower
>>> (pun intended ;-) ) we all are trying to build. That would be "the
>>> current times way"...
>>>
>>>
>>> 2010/2/5 Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>>
>>>
>>> Tom,
>>>
>>> I'm sure Ren? and those working diligently to effect the transfer of
>>> NetRexx from IBM to RexxLA appreciate the enthusiasm that you,
>>> David, Kermit, and others have demonstrated for this project, but I
>>> think we all need to slow down and take a breath.
>>>
>>> Our baby is not yet walking and you are already discussing which
>>> motorcycle to buy for him. :-)
>>>
>>> I think a couple of things should be self-evident: we have some
>>> world-class intellectual resources within RexxLA (Ren? and Mike, for
>>> starters), we have the experience of having done the same process
>>> with ooRexx, and we have a passionate (rabid?) group of NetRexx
>>> enthusiasts trying to wait for Christmas morning.
>>>
>>> There are many fundamental issues that need to be addressed by the
>>> NetRexx team and the RexxLA Board and Officers. Believe me, we have
>>> a lot more questions than you do, many of which are quite prosaic
>>> and unglamorous, but crucial to the success of this project. We
>>> learned a lot from the ooRexx project and will incorporate those
>>> lessons into the organization and charter of the NetRexx project.
>>>
>>> At this point, fixed written-in-stone specifics are hard to come by,
>>> so I hope you (and everyone else chomping at the bit) will take
>>> comfort in the philosophy to which all of us are committed, that
>>> being the fundamental tenets of The Rexx Language, as laid out by
>>> Mike in TRL and TNRL. Ren? said as much in his answer to David's
>>> fourth question, when he referred to following The Rexx Way (my
>>> caps) of Discuss, Agree, Document, then Implement.
>>>
>>> Thus, if you haven't seen any Discussion of a particular issue, it
>>> probably means we haven't gotten to that stage yet.
>>>
>>> I would suggest that you not make any decisions about various code
>>> or doc repositories until we figure out where and how the NetRexx
>>> code will be housed. It will be much less confusing for users to
>>> have only one location to find NetRexx resources, than a bookmark
>>> file full of broken or obsolete links.
>>>
>>> IMHO, of course.
>>>
>>> -Chip-
>>>
>>> On 2/5/10 05:22 Thomas Schneider said:
>>> > to follow UP the idea of putting *any and all* Utilities
>>> (including mine)
>>> > to www.NetRexx.org <http://www.NetRexx.org>:
>>> >
>>> > What does this mean for my (private) directory structure ?
>>> >
>>> > When you like, I can send you my current one, but I am not so
>>> much
>>> > satisfied
>>> > with what I do have, and will need (please)
>>> >
>>> > your advise:
>>> >
>>> > How could/should we structure the whole project www.NetRexx.org
>>> <http://www.NetRexx.org> ??
>>> >
>>> > Your advise will be welcome ...
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2/5/10 03:48 Thomas Schneider said:
>>>
>>> I am currently in the process to buildup the new
>>> www.Rexx2Nrx.com <http://www.Rexx2Nrx.com> homepage.
>>>
>>> Might it be that this would be a good instance to store all
>>> those tools available in a central
>>> place ?
>>>
>>> Kermit Kiser schrieb:
>>>
>>> I have seen a lot of RFEs floating around but no safe place
>>> to store them all or discuss them. Could you do something
>>> like that with your site?
>>>
>>> David Requena wrote:
>>>
>>> The thing is... for the first time I got the feeling
>>> this process is actually advancing in some direction.
>>> We all, as NetRexx developers hoping to see the language
>>> advance, are eagerly awaiting for the
>>> culmination of a process about which we have near to no
>>> information.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>>> [hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Saludos / Regards,
>>> David Requena
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>
>

Tom. (ths@db-123.com)

Kermit Kiser

Some questions on NetRexx open sourcing process

In reply to this post by Aviatrexx

Chip & all ;

As Jeff just pointed out in a separate message, when you go to the
RexxLA web site, you see a lot of "Under Construction" messages and very
little in the way of resources. I am not saying that RexxLA is a total
failure at providing Rexx info, just that it does not look very
successful yet. And when it comes to NetRexx info, there is virtually
zero. Hopefully that will improve when NetRexx is finally open source.
But that project is almost two years underway now (officially) and we
still don't know when it will complete.

Meanwhile, some of us are doing stuff with NetRexx right now. That
includes a desire to see NetRexx succeed and grow to remain a viable
option for our projects long term. When Ren? said we should start
getting stuff ready, I admit I misinterpreted that to mean that RFE
discussion was now fair game, but even with that on hold along with some
of our projects like my scripting modules which are waiting on OSS
NetRexx, there is still a lot we can do. It is great if RexxLA wants to
provide the central portal for NetRexx and related resources, but that
does not mean that we should put everything on hold indefinitely. On the
contrary, we should be getting ready now as Ren? said. And since Rexx
projects are mostly separate items on Sourceforge now, a consolidated
repository would put NetRexx way ahead, IMHO.

Thanks to RexxLA, IBM (Mike & Ren??) found a way to open source NetRexx.
But most of RexxLA is probably not interested in NetRexx at this point,
so WE are the NetRexx community right now.

Just my opinion.

-- Kermit

Chip Davis wrote:

123