Ken,

     I like your funding idea for the HP3000 development.  But, thinking like my
     management for a moment, I suggest one small change to the model.  Since
     this additional money is "customer-provided", then the customer, namely the
     HP3000-L  and Interex community, should have the guiding hand in what the
     funds are used for.  For example, getting the GNU C++ compiler, Samba and
     the Apache server as SUPPORTED software distributed on the FOS tape.  The
     exact items to be funded can be determined using Interex's weighted dollars
     approach method.

     I'm sure that most, if not all, HP3000 sites will be willing to kick in the
     extra bucks provided we (our management) are guaranteed a payoff.  However,
     neither I nor my management are willing to give carte blanche to any
     outside organization to act in our "best interests".  Our world is full of
     organizations taking the money from one program to support another under
     the description of "acting in your best interests."

     Just My Thoughts On The Subject,

     John Hornberger
     Sr. Systems Programmer
     General Signal Services
     [log in to unmask]


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: HP 3000 Strategic 5-Year Plan Addendum (long)
Author:  Ken Sletten B894 C312 x62525 <[log in to unmask]> at Internet2
Date:    3/1/97 3:29 AM


==================================
HP 3000 Strategic 5-Year Plan:  An Addendum
==================================

     (BIG Snip)

Having invested this much time and money already, it's
clearly worth it to our site to spend a little more on HP
support costs in the outyears to augment R&D on the
3000 at CSY and Roseville;    **  PROVIDING **
we can be sure beyond a reasonable doubt that any
additional contribution we might make in that direction
goes directly to CSY, and not into some generic HP slush
fund.  AND that HP does not reduce it's current
projected spending on HP 3000 R&D;  i.e.:  this gets
added above and beyond the current levels of R&D
spending. This is something the 3000 user base would
have to get in writing, signed by someone like Dick Watts.

I say HP should formally poll all 3000 sites that are now
paying software support.  And I mean there should be a
serious effort to contact system managers, not just send
a letter to the address that pays the monthly bill for each
site (the financial office may not even know what a 3000
is, and just round-file the letter).

If a majority of 3000 sites on HP support vote in the
affirmative, then I propose ALL HP support contracts
get a software product number added for "CSY R&D",
at a base rate of  $52 / month = $624 / year.  It would
perhaps be appropriate to have some kind of tiered
pricing so the average yearly contribution of all HP
3000 sites to "CSY R&D" would approach $1000 per
year.  Since HP is already set up to collect money for
product numbers on support contracts, this should be a
very easy thing to implement;  i.e.:  There should be no
"carrying charge" or etc. that would reduce the amount
going directly to R&D.

     (Big Snip)

I solicit critical peer review of this proposal, and would
like to hear if the general consensus of 3000-L is yea or
nay.  I should have had more time to fine-tune it.  But I
don't.  So this will have to do for now.  I intend to bring
it up for discussion at the IPROF management roundtable..

Ken Sletten   360-396-2525
[log in to unmask]
Box 196;    Keyport, WA 98345-0196