> From: John R. Wolff [mailto:[log in to unmask]]

<-- snip -->

>
> Therefore, I now feel that I wasted 10 out of 20 votes on expressing a
> sentiment (already understood by HP/CSY), that should have
> been covered
> elsewhere in a simple survey.  I would have otherwise
> allocated those 10
> votes to practical lab projects of interest to my company, had I been
> properly informed.  This item should have been eliminated
> from the list
> because it is not a technical project (unless the meaning of the item
> would
> be to enhance the internal documentation of MPE to get it in shape for
> release to outside parties, in which case it was poorly worded).
>

In its original form, the question was quite explicit and encompassing of
many possibilities including preparing MPE for licensing to outside parties.
CSY would not accept it in that form because they felt it was too limiting.
We compromised on the very vaguely worded statement that appears in the SIB.
Depending upon what CSY decides to do, this could generate a lot of lab work
or almost none at all. <opinion on> Unfortunately, CSY does not see any
urgency in making a decision. Even though we all expect item #1 to finish
first by a lot, there is still value in showing CSY that those customers who
care enough to vote are anxious for CSY to decide what it will and will not
allow. </opinion off>

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *