4+ hours ago Yosef Rosenblatt said:

> Open Letter to Jon Backus and the Board of OpenMPE Inc.,
>
> First, I wish to thank you for all of the work you
> have done.

:-)

> ... From what I have gleaned from what you wrote about
> the session HP gave a firm commitment, with caveats,
> to think about giving its blessing to the emulator
> project.  ...

What I heard HP Mike Paivinen say was "YES" to OpenMPE
"Gang of 6" number 3;  i.e.:  "Allow 3rd-party creation
of an MPE emulator"...  So I read that as more than just
"think about giving its blessing"...  :-)  However, you
are right about not all details not being worked out yet;
I'm still hopefully they will become so by Thanksgiving
or by end of CY 2002 at the latest...

> What is not clear is what emulator project encompasses.

Did the various posts since 13:00 (especially those by
Gavin) help clear that up at least to some extent ?  :-)

> ...  The emulator cannot be all things to all people
> so it needs to be defined.

The licensing fee and distribution mechanism and (maybe)
a few details regarding HPSUSAN etc. still need to be
discussed.  But I'm comfortable with Gavin's assertion
that he feels he knows *exactly* what an "MPE Platform
Emulator" means as far as *technical* implementation...
Guess I'm not quite sure what Yosef's last two above are
most focused on...  Maybe best thing I could do is just
ask:  Is there anyone out there who substantially in
whole or in part disagrees with or questions what Gavin
said today about Allegro's view of an emulator;  in
however many messages it was that he posted ??

> ... I would like to suggest that the BOD ask these
> people and others to form a committee to define the
> emulator project. This would be productive not only
> because of the resulting definition, it would also
> stop the bickering.

Speaking again just for myself right now, think I would
respectfully try and move the pointer back to a number
of things that Gavin mentioned;  i.e.:  Definition by
committee tends to be difficult and time-consuming.  All
suggestions are certainly welcome (as G. also said), but
from my perspective if and when HP comes out with a
reasonable license fee and a reasonable distribution
mechanism, I'm hoping Allegro and SRI will just go for
it.  If questions come up where they think they have not
gotten sufficient user input, I'm sure they will not be
bashful about coming back to this list and asking...  :-)
Mabye I'm still missing something, but given reasonable
"details" from HP, I don't see that there is a lot more
that needs to be "defined"..  Please submit any and all
contrary opinions.

> Please forgive me for weighing in on this topic.

Absolutely no apology necessary;  thank you for your
contribution to the ongoing discussion...

Ken Sletten