Just to push plan  #2's logic to its end. By the way,  I'm surprised to see so
little reaction in LSTSRV-L about  this topic, especially from postmasters and
still more from EARN postmasters. Don't  you care, or don't you realize what's
being bet in this game?
 
>1.  It is  very, very  difficult  to define  what  is an  "update which  adds
>   significant new function".
 
I agree. I only suggested that as  a possibility. We could also say "EARN will
pay X$ to  Eric Thomas for every  new release". Or whatever  else, this should
not be the most difficult part.
 
>2.  Could you  clarify  exactly who  would  write the  code  updates and  who
>   installs them?  From what  I understand,  I would be  the one  writing the
>   updates for  everybody (please  correct me if  I misunderstood);  EARN and
>   BITNET would run  the exact same code. The problem  is that this conflicts
>   with the fact that EARN support is  provided by someone else, ie how can I
>   fix a problem which has been reported to another person?
 
EARN would get no fixes from you, nor  would you have to receive or accept any
bug report. The EARN  expert would reply to questions, and  maybe (in the rare
event of a  bug which was only  noticed in EARN), provide a  temporary fix. If
then he created a  problem with a newer version from you, this  will be him to
blame; anyway he would be the person actually sending the INSTALL shipments to
EARN, so he could check.
 
>3. Because of (2), and still assuming I am the one writing all the code, this
>   other person would have  to forward bug reports to me  *OR* EARN would not
>   be allowed to submit bug reports.
 
EARN  would not  be allowed  to  submit bug  reports  to you.  They should  be
submitted to  the EARN expert, who  might or not  be able to provide  a patch,
depending on his qualification; but this is to EARN to decide.
 
>4. Who  maintains PEERS NAMES?  If the  backbone is to  remain as it  is now,
>   there must  be a  unique PEERS  NAMES file for  EARN and  non-EARN servers
>   alike. I  could maintain the  non-EARN entries, whereas the  EARN employee
>   would process EARN  update requests and send me an  updated version of the
>   EARN entries every other week, for example.
 
I see that as perfectly reasonable.
 
>5. What happens when someone from EARN requests an improvement to the code? I
>   assume this  request has  to be  sent to  the EARN  employee in  charge of
>   LISTSERV. But  then what  does he do  with it? Should  he filter  them and
>   forward a selection to me? What if I refuse to implement it?
 
That's  to you  to choose.  In fact  you've never  followed *all*  suggestions
you've been given :-) And if  an improvement requirement is reasonable enough,
it should appear  sooner or later out  of EARN. In an ultimate  case, the EARN
expert could  decide to write  some additional code,  keeping in mind  that he
should port all mods or extensions to fit into your new releases, at his risk.
In any  case I find this  better than having  all the development done  by the
EARN expert.
 
>Eric
 
  Jose Maria