On Sun, 10 Sep 89 21:20:01 GMT Eric Thomas said:
>Michael, the  present release  of LISTSERV has  no future,  for technical
>reasons which I have probably  already explained. The new functionality I
>have introduced  has been, most  of the time,  bug fixes and  things that
>were really needed to help the  network stay alive, like the BSMTP header
>stuff. Yes, from time to time  I have made enhancements that were neither
>fixes nor absolutely needed functions, but these were either minor things
>(like  change "Ack="  to default  to "No")  or things  which were  a good
>investment   because    they   actually   save   me    time,   like   the
>single-nastygram-error-report function.
>
>  Eric
 
Ok, here are my concerns...
 
Will a new listserv be developed? Will it be compatible with EARN? Will it
be compatible with older listservs? Will it be documented? Will it be
coordinated in its development so that certain needed functions can be
addressed? Will this new listserv be free for use? Will paying people to
develop a new listserv without having to have listserv sites pay for the
product be sufficient? Who is going to develop the new listserv? When
will this new listserv development commence?
 
I do not expect answers to any of these questions. I have to go on the
assumption that what we have now is all we have to go on. That is why
I bring up the subject of documentation so that people who have time
to work on the program might put in some of the other needed functionality
and keep it in step with EARN (and EARN in step with non-EARN). I would
also like to think that BITNET is still largely a VOLUNTEER effort and
that financial solutions to problems should not always be thought of
as solutions -- only last possible solutions. Am I making myself clear?
If not, please tell me... It is true that there is some work that really
must be paid for when it goes above and beyond regular volunteer efforts.
It is my personal belief that the current listserv has not been funded
and should not be funded at this time. If a new one were to be developed,
one that is faster with even more functionality (not just the needed stuff),
then I could seeing paying (not a huge amount) for its development as long
as it met the needs of the entire network (that means all cooperating factions
of the network). This is, of course, my opinion.
 
/mrg