Date:	20 Sep 1997 03:16:00 +0200
From:	mjs AT prg DOT hannover DOT sgh-net DOT de (Mark Junker)
To:	opendos AT delorie DOT com
Message-ID:	<6eCd1wKO8gB@prg.hannover.sgh-net.de>
References:	<19970919221921 DOT 32290 DOT qmail AT caldera DOT caldera DOT com>
Subject:	Re: For Sale or For Free: The Debate Continues
MIME-Version:	1.0

Hi tbird,

you wrote 19.09.97 in the Area /List/OpenDOS
to the mail "Re: For Sale or For Free: The Debate Continues":

[..]
> negative reaction that occurred on opendos AT caldera DOT com was detrimental
> rather than constructive at changing minds at Caldera.
Yes, I know what you mean but how should we react? What can we do to  
change minds at Caldera?

I know that when there is an official group at Caldera that organizes  
all changes to the kernel, makes fixes available, collects user-made  
enhancements/fixes and build them into the kernel, it would help making/ 
publishing changes to the kernel much more easy and lots of people  
really *see* that something happens ... the don't get the feeling that  
they're (coding) alone.
Example: The new OD702 is out and has kernel-changes but the kernel- 
sources are the old ones. With the way suggested above, this didn't  
happen ...

BTW: The kernel-support could also be done by some private programmers  
that have very good contacts to Caldera. I mean someone who knows what  
they'll do at Caldera, directly work together with Caldera ... it may  
help a lot when this programmer lives near Caldera where they'll support  
the OpenDOS code.

BTW2: When we want to create a *real* multi-tasking-kernel in future we  
cannot get around working *together with * (not parallel/against)  
Caldera ... and we need the sources of EMM386 !).

> Sorry for going on so long.
It was a good posting ... clear, friendly - not flame-style ... missed  
this in the last one or two weeks ...


Regards, MJS

- Raw text -