>Some notes about the LISTSERV/LISTEARN split:
>
>  And  as an  EARN postmaster,  I  would hate  to  see LISTSERV  split in  two
>  separate backbones (for  technical reasons), as much as I  would hate to see
>  LISTSERV (or LISTEARN) supported by someone different from Eric.
As EARN user (and local-LISTSERV-mini-guru, meaning that LOCALLY I'm
considered as a person who knows about the issue) I must agree with you.
I can't believe any one else could get anywhere near Eric's understanding
and knowledge of LISTSERV, and I'm afraid no one would give the same
support (or anything near it); I think the response time of the person
in charge of LISTEARN support would look more like APAR to PUT time or
even worse.
>* Assuming that Eric's proposal is succesful,  I'd pay to get LISTSERV instead
>  of LISTEARN. EARN  has *some* money to pay for  development and maintenance,
>  but they  don't even  know what are  the tasks they  should assign  to these
>  people. This is why they didn't still contract anyone, even if there is some
>  (limited) budget assigned for that this year.
>
>  And given  the continuous  battles and  differences between  EARN countries,
>  major problems can be  expected with the LISTEARN software as  soon as it is
>  touched by EARN.  This without considering that it's  almost impossible that
>  they can find a  programmer like Eric for the salary  and stability they can
>  offer.
>
>I just came back  after a quite nasty influenza, and my  thoughts are not very
>clear today -- you'll have to excuse  any reiteration or obscurity in my mail.
>But I felt unable to stay silent in view of what's going on.
>
>  Jose Maria