>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