Hi all,

Well, I've read with enthusiasm, the replies to the earlier
post.  Thanks for taking the time to voice your view.

One thing I want to make clear though.  I happen to agree
with Bruce and others about just "paying a vendor" to do a
port.  I probably should have expounded on that a bit.

I firmly believe that if any vendor (big, small, whatever)
AND HP should have some "skin" in any project undertaken.
This means that HP provide some measure and level of
support, and the vendor is COMMITTED to the port, the
product, and the support of the resulting product.

I'm aware of the Progress port, the Oracle support issue and
other such projects.  A number of things went wrong there,
but one thing was or is missing, and that's the passion for
the product/platform, and the committment for their product.
Without that committment, no good can come from a project
such as this.

So - put me on record as saying that everyone involved has
to "have some skin" in the project.  I remember saying to
someone - "just throwing money at a problem dosen't solve
it" and that's the case here.  Money will be needed, whether
that's cash, personnel, outside resources, whatever - but it
has to come from everybody.

Have a great weekend all :-)

Best,
Joe