Re: Re: Peter still in misery (was: Jan doesn't want Peter to know (was: Peter wants

pa3efu said:
> jj> I am not being evasive, I just happened to have decided
> not  to give
> jj> you
> jj> anymore information then that I see fit.
>
> pdw> To what end?
>
> My discretion

Well, thats a position which makes any factual discussion impossible ...
perhaps that's the whole point ....


> pdw> OK, lets approach this differently -- what is your opinion as
> to why IBM
> pdw> seemingly refuses to
> pdw> license its software stack on Hercules?
>
> The whole world is still surprised about IBM's sudden engagement
> with Linux,
> it is fair to say that hercules goes more than one step further.

Are you willing to explain this further?  I don't quite grok the
connection between IBM's adoption of Linux in relation to Hercules.


> I know that there are some people within ibm that have reservations  wrt
> hercules,
> there are also those who are quite fond of hercules.  I would
> estimate that
> this division is along the lines of hardware vs software people.

I can't tell from your comment which faction, IBM hardware or software,
you are asserting is fond of Hercules.  Is it your estimation that the
software people, the ones that refuse to commercially license their
product to Hercules, the ones that refuse to allow developers to use their
software on Hercules, are the fond ones, or perhaps you mean its the
hardware folks?


>
> I do not think IBM can legally exclude certain software combinations
> nor would even try.
> (Analogous to bill gates preventing netscape to run under windows)

So are you saying IBM presently generally licenses its software stack for
use on Hercules?  Can you share a phone number that one can call to get a
commecial or developer license to IBM software for use on Hercules?  Or
are you saying that IBM will do so once someone starts some administrative
or legal action against their present position?


>
> Quite frankly, I do not think that you have enough clou[t]to bully  ibm
> into anything
>

Finally, a point in which we are in perfect agreement!!!!


>
>
> One of my concerns is that when clear this with you, you will find
> something
> else which is not to your liking.
> When the European government was so kind to sponsor hercules
> developers to a
> workshop here in europe, we decided not to include any proprietary
> items.
> All hercules source code is currently derived from public accessible
> information.
> Hercules as an open source effort has really benefited from this
> workshop.
>

Its not a matter of my liking, its a matter of what is true.  Do you
consider modern VM source code "public accessible information"?

>
> I think it is an objective assessment that ibm is not concerned to  the
> exten[t] where
> they would actually write to me about it.
>

Do you have a position on whether or not Hercules development even has to
be concerned about patent claims?

> At least they are having fun.
>
> You are really keen aren't you?
>
> I am honored that you announce this first on a hercules list,
> whereas people
> on the flex-es list still have to be informed (at the time of
> writing this)
> Maybe someone can cross post this?
>
> I think that you are slowly starting to get the idea.
>

Well, thats a position which makes any factual discussion impossible ...
perhaps that's the whole point ....


> >
> Let us keep it at obtain from ibm, through regular channels, without
> having to
> sign any license, or pay any abnormal fees.
> We are thinking along the same lines here.

I'm not sure we are.   Do you consider documents associated with
early release or developer's programs "regular channels"?


>
> I have the document right here in front of me, and the above most
> certainly applies,
> just one general copyright notice, not even a reference to a patent
> (sorry).
>

Did you mention that document when you posted your list of documents
which purported to prove z/SIE was publically documented?

>
> jj> However if you feel that confidential information has been leaked
> jj> from fsi to
> jj> the hercules developers, then I am quite happy to investigate this
> jj> for you.
>
> pdw> Thanks for the offer, but I do not believe that to be the case.
>
> I can well understand that you want to keep these sensitive matters
> within your own hands.
>

What point are you trying to make in the immediately above exchange?




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get 128 Bit SSL Encryption!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/JjlUgA/vN2EAA/kG8FAA/dpFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/