On Wed, 15 Sep 1993 11:10:49 EDT "Sathaye, Shashi"
<[log in to unmask]> said:
 
>We are 'the backbone' listserv and we are not 'backdated'.
 
Most of  these jobs  come from  a server in  Brazil that  I am  unable to
update because it is chronically screwed up, I guess they have a bad disk
unit or a  MW link or whatever. The  more you fix it, the  more it breaks
again a few months later.
 
>On a differnt topic : if we cannot afford to pay for the current version
>would we still be 'backbone' server?
 
It is an  open question. Initially, yes.  In the longer term,  I doubt it
will be possible to maintain 100% compatibility with the new VMS and unix
versions,  and L-Soft  is  unlikely  to slow  down  development or  write
special  migration/gateway code  just  so that  non-paying customers  can
remain  on the  backbone.  I wouldn't  have  done it  one  year ago  when
LISTSERV was still  free - I'd have called  it a waste of my  time, and a
bad idea anyway since I can't  write fixes for back-level sites. Now that
it's a waste of "development resources"  and an "incentive for people not
to become paying customers", it's even less likely to happen :-)
 
While  I can't  make  any guarantee,  I'd  say you  would  remain on  the
backbone for  6-12 months,  but once  the VMS and  unix versions  hit the
street (4Q94-1Q95) this will probably not be possible.
 
  Eric