OPENMPE Archives

October 2002

OPENMPE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Chuck Ryan <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 3 Oct 2002 20:25:14 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
> -----Original Message-----
> From: VANCE,JEFF (HP-Cupertino,ex1) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, October 03, 2002 4:29 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: MPE source (was: POSIX on MPE)
>
>
> ...
> > Perhaps HP would consider releasing the source to an earlier
> > version of MPE?
> > Version 5.5 or 6.0 would be a great starting point for future
> > development
> > and would take care of eliminating STM and some of the other
> > "enhancements" we have seen of late.
> ...
>
> At this time HP has no plans to release the source code for any
> version of MPE to the general public. There are many reasons,
> and others on this list are aware of at least some of the
> reasons.
>
> But, even if we did offer MPE source to the public, how easy
> do you think it would be to make a change in MPE and verify
> that the change is correct and does not have any negative
> side effects?
>
> regards,
>  Jeff Vance, "CSY"
>

Um Jeff, you do know that some of us are actually programmers that do have
some small idea of what is involved in maintaining and enhancing old code?

The repeated statements made by you and others at CSY have led me to expect
a mass of undocumented hacks and quick fixes that will be no small challenge
to work with. Which is why I think rolling back to a version before the
large number of appeasement changes might provide the most stable code base.

Comments are my own, not my employer's... etc.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2