date:20020408


On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:

> A very neatly done Forum that you have created.

Thank you - but I didn't create it - I just installed, configured and 
expanded it a little. :o)

If anyone has any ideas for forums they'd like to see there, and 
especially if they'd like to moderate their own forums, please let me 
know.

Dave
http://ql.spodmail.com/

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dexter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> Wow ! ... I guess everything in Texas is big then :-)
>
>Well, TX weather is a case of extremes. There's warm and humid air 
>circulating up from the gulf of Mexico, and cold, dry air coming down from 
>alaska/canada... They meet in a spectacular line that spawns terrific 
>storms, tornados, hail that has been known to put bullet holes in the tops 
>of peoples' heads, and often 12 inches of rain in one hour, causing flash 
>floods that are more than rising water, and literally like the rumble in 
>the distance that appears as a wave six foot high.
>
>I live on high ground. :o)

A wise man, then :-)

>> Also given the time difference, my 'last night' was probably your
>> morning.
>
>I can see a couple of people tried to access www.ql.spodmail.com and one 
>person (I won't name you, but I know who you are!) tried to access 
>ql.spodmail.com/qeyboard and ql.spodmail.com/goldfire *tsk tsk*
>
>It's http://ql.spodmail.com/

Yes, just logged on OK this evening ... and registered.

A very neatly done Forum that you have created.

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

Re: [ql-users] EasyPtr

2002-04-08 Thread Wolfgang Uhlig


Hi Per and all the others,

>If the "QL" is to survive we need a steady supply of new programs. To
>realise that, we need good tools! EasyPTR is such a tool. We cannot afford
>to let it become obsolete!
I am absolutely of the same opinion!

>Finally, when PE has been upgraded to handle the new
>colour modes, EasyPTR will require and extensive revamp to cope with them
>too. This could be a major undertaking.
 As far as I know, Marcel will try to get in contact with Albin in order to get him to 
correct 
and improve some things. But even so, if there is a possibility to do things, I am 
willing to
contribute in any way I can. Concerning the german comments, if there are problems of 
understanding I could help.

>No self-respecting Tinkerer should be without EasyPTR!
Correct! Look at what can be done already, even with colours, by downloading the 
Qcolour-suite from Thierry's, Jochen's or Dilwyn's website.

Wolfgang Uhlig

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

2002-04-08 Thread Wolfgang Uhlig


Hi,

>I am moderately optimistic about GTK, next version of it is rumored
>to be able to run on simple framebuffer devices and that would be very
>simple to do in QDOS.
>Richard
I'm new in the users-group, Richard (or who else), what is GTK?
Und Richard, warum kommst du nie mehr nach Eindhoven?

Wolfgang Uhlig

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:

> Wow ! ... I guess everything in Texas is big then :-)

Well, TX weather is a case of extremes. There's warm and humid air 
circulating up from the gulf of Mexico, and cold, dry air coming down from 
alaska/canada... They meet in a spectacular line that spawns terrific 
storms, tornados, hail that has been known to put bullet holes in the tops 
of peoples' heads, and often 12 inches of rain in one hour, causing flash 
floods that are more than rising water, and literally like the rumble in 
the distance that appears as a wave six foot high.

I live on high ground. :o)

> Also given the time difference, my 'last night' was probably your
> morning.

I can see a couple of people tried to access www.ql.spodmail.com and one 
person (I won't name you, but I know who you are!) tried to access 
ql.spodmail.com/qeyboard and ql.spodmail.com/goldfire *tsk tsk*

It's http://ql.spodmail.com/

Dave
http://ql.spodmail.com/
*grins*

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 22:10:09, Dexter wrote:
(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)

>On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> In addition you should find C68 on the QL easy to adapt to.
>
>If using it is anything like using GCC, I'll be fine...
>
>> >ql.spodmail.com
>> >(New posts by Nasta in the forum, with latest news on the Goldfire,
>> >Aurora 2 and SuperIDE/EtherIDE - check it out!)
>>
>> The site was down when I looked last night.
>
>Did you type www. in front of it? It was definitely up last night. I was
>sat there nursing it through a storm - we had 15 inches of rain last
>night, and some hail too. Texas is grand when it comes to extreme weather.
>Luckily, the power was only out for about 20 minutes, and the UPSes can
>hold out for about 35 minutes.
>
>It was a very pretty storm though :o)

I won't forget the flight across the USA a few years back between the
East and West coast QL shows.  We had the most amazing aerial view of
storms below us.  That was the time when a plane was hit and crashed
somewhere in the Rockies, I think.
The US certainly does have grand storms, but it is a big place (8-)#
-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
   Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dexter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> In addition you should find C68 on the QL easy to adapt to.
>
>If using it is anything like using GCC, I'll be fine...

You will ...

>> >ql.spodmail.com
>> >(New posts by Nasta in the forum, with latest news on the Goldfire, 
>> >Aurora 2 and SuperIDE/EtherIDE - check it out!)
>> 
>> The site was down when I looked last night.
>
>Did you type www. in front of it? It was definitely up last night. I was 
>sat there nursing it through a storm - we had 15 inches of rain last 
>night, and some hail too. Texas is grand when it comes to extreme weather. 
>Luckily, the power was only out for about 20 minutes, and the UPSes can 
>hold out for about 35 minutes.
>
>It was a very pretty storm though :o)

Wow ! ... I guess everything in Texas is big then :-)

Also given the time difference, my 'last night' was probably your
morning.

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Tony Firshman
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 19:31:27, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>(ref: )
>
>
>>Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
>>donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
>>post.
>Who donated you lots of 110 ac power supplies with US plugs, or are you
>forgetting that he lives in the USA (8-)#

He .. he .. I meant UK ones :-)

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

[ql-users] Turbo 4.15


Turbo Compiler version 4 release 15 (v4.15) from George Gwilt is now
on the Other Software Page on my website.

This corrects a problem in the use of TO with CON/SCR channels.

--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:

> In addition you should find C68 on the QL easy to adapt to.

If using it is anything like using GCC, I'll be fine...

> >ql.spodmail.com
> >(New posts by Nasta in the forum, with latest news on the Goldfire, 
> >Aurora 2 and SuperIDE/EtherIDE - check it out!)
> 
> The site was down when I looked last night.

Did you type www. in front of it? It was definitely up last night. I was 
sat there nursing it through a storm - we had 15 inches of rain last 
night, and some hail too. Texas is grand when it comes to extreme weather. 
Luckily, the power was only out for about 20 minutes, and the UPSes can 
hold out for about 35 minutes.

It was a very pretty storm though :o)

Dave
ql.spodmail.com

Re: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


Any chance of a copy please Tony?

>>>I got some hard copy with the one that Ruth sent me.  I can either
photocopy
>>>and send via snail mail, or I can scan it in and send to you.
>> Thanks - a scanned copy would be great, thanks.
>Stop that scan - I got a quill.doc from Italy.
>
>Thanks folks.

--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dexter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> Very interesting outline ... you have been planning :-)
>
>Yes. It's hard to do anything more than planning without ethernet and a 
>TCP/IP stack ;)

It is the latter that Jon Dent has been working on.

>> What are you going to code it in ... C ?
>
>Initially, SBASIC, and then in C once I'm happy with how it works. I'm 
>happier with C but have never done any on the QL, whereas SBASIC is a 
>quicker throw-it-together-and-test-it language :o) It's not like email 
>clients have to be fast, anyway.

Yes, I have looked at the coding in BASIC of several email clients on my
old RISC OS system.

In addition you should find C68 on the QL easy to adapt to.

>> Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
>> donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
>> post.
>
>I wonder. Do the transformers in QL PSUs have 120 and 240v windings, or 
>did they use a different transformer for each region?

Dunno ... :-(

>Dave
>ql.spodmail.com
>(New posts by Nasta in the forum, with latest news on the Goldfire, 
>Aurora 2 and SuperIDE/EtherIDE - check it out!)

The site was down when I looked last night.

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

Re: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


>Tony,
>
>I got some hard copy with the one that Ruth sent me.  I can either
photocopy
>and send via snail mail, or I can scan it in and send to you.
>
>Tim Swenson

Tim - Stuart (Miracle) has in the past allowed me to put the manuals
for his other products on my website. Do you think I could have a copy
of the Miracle Hard Disk text too, then next time I contact Stuart I
can ask him if he minds me adding the Miracle HD "manual" to the other
replacement manuals on my website.

--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html

Re: [ql-users] EasyPtr


>You all know the super EasyPTR suit of programs and utilities from
Albin
>Hessler? In response to my query, Albin writes that he would be happy
>to supply the source code to a person or persons willing to update
and
>upgrade them! Most of this code is written in assembler with comments
>in German. I dont know what arrangement is envisioned, as this is
still a
>commecial program (available from JMS). If you are interested, please
>get in touch with Albin yourself (If you dont already have his email
>address you can mail me privately for it, or to pass on a message). I
>really hope that there is someone with the time, inclination and
ability to
>take on this task. I myself would be willing to do something for the
>(English) manual, if wanted.

A note of caution: when I last spoke to him he said he had no English
manual for it!

>If the "QL" is to survive we need a steady supply of new programs. To
>realise that, we need good tools! EasyPTR is such a tool. We cannot
afford
>to let it become obsolete!

Absolutely, Easyptr takes some getting used to but is far easier than
QPTR toolkit. Makes the task of writing moderately complex programs
much easier!

>No self-respecting Tinkerer should be without EasyPTR!

Agreed 100%

--
Dilwyn Jones
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 21:08:25, Dexter wrote:
(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)


>> Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
>> donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
>> post.
>
>I wonder. Do the transformers in QL PSUs have 120 and 240v windings, or
>did they use a different transformer for each region?
They don't - I think Malcolm was confused.

-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
   Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 19:31:27, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
(ref: )


>Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
>donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
>post.
Who donated you lots of 110 ac power supplies with US plugs, or are you
forgetting that he lives in the USA (8-)#

-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
   Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 19:21:23, Tony Firshman wrote:
(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)

>On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 11:14:27, Timothy Swenson wrote:
>(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)
>
>>Tony,
>>
>>I got some hard copy with the one that Ruth sent me.  I can either photocopy
>>and send via snail mail, or I can scan it in and send to you.
> Thanks - a scanned copy would be great, thanks.
Stop that scan - I got a quill.doc from Italy.

Thanks folks.


-- 
  QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
   tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
 TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Phoebus Dokos wrote:

> I am not sure if Jon's QLTCP has an SBasic I/F ... maybe you will have to 
> resort to access it using the tried and true Peek/Poke S*Basic "interface" ;-)

If the worst comes to the worst, I would write some kind of front end for 
it, but that's distraction from my core business - getting new things out 
there :o)

> However a European PSU will work with a US QL if you use a step up 
> transformer...

I've seen transformer winding kits up to the job for $20 in a local parts 
outlet. Could be fun - been ages since I last wound a custom transformer 
:o)

> P.S. Damn that 6 Gb drive takes forever to format with QubIDE ;-)

How long would the 80 gigger I just bought take then? Hopefully, it'll be 
quicker on the SuperIDE :o)

Dave
ql.spodmail.com

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

2002-04-08 Thread Phoebus Dokos

At 04:08 ìì 8/4/2002, the Daveman wrote:

>Initially, SBASIC, and then in C once I'm happy with how it works. I'm
>happier with C but have never done any on the QL, whereas SBASIC is a
>quicker throw-it-together-and-test-it language :o) It's not like email
>clients have to be fast, anyway.

I am not sure if Jon's QLTCP has an SBasic I/F ... maybe you will have to 
resort to access it using the tried and true Peek/Poke S*Basic "interface" ;-)

> > Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
> > donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
> > post.
>
>I wonder. Do the transformers in QL PSUs have 120 and 240v windings, or
>did they use a different transformer for each region?

Different from what I recall
However a European PSU will work with a US QL if you use a step up 
transformer...

Phoebus

P.S. Damn that 6 Gb drive takes forever to format with QubIDE ;-)

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:

> Very interesting outline ... you have been planning :-)

Yes. It's hard to do anything more than planning without ethernet and a 
TCP/IP stack ;)

> What are you going to code it in ... C ?

Initially, SBASIC, and then in C once I'm happy with how it works. I'm 
happier with C but have never done any on the QL, whereas SBASIC is a 
quicker throw-it-together-and-test-it language :o) It's not like email 
clients have to be fast, anyway.

> Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
> donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
> post.

I wonder. Do the transformers in QL PSUs have 120 and 240v windings, or 
did they use a different transformer for each region?

Dave
ql.spodmail.com
(New posts by Nasta in the forum, with latest news on the Goldfire, 
Aurora 2 and SuperIDE/EtherIDE - check it out!)

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum


In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dexter
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>On Sun, 7 Apr 2002, Malcolm Cadman wrote:
>
>> Probably best to have a look, then.  Although I am a great believer in
>> alternatives ... it makes for more challenges.
>
>Well here's the plan:
>
>The program has a config file with sensible defaults. The first time it's 
>run it asks for your name, email address, POP3 and SMTP servers. It asks 
>if you want to set up a .sig file.
>
>After that, and immediately for all subsequent executions, it goes to the 
>folder display. This gives you access to your inbox, outbox, and archived 
>mail in month-by-month folders. Archived mail is compressed.
>
>It will as far as possible use pine keypresses to do thing, providing a 
>useful subset of functionality. It will do everything plain text. If it 
>receives email in HTML format, it will strip out or obey the tags the best 
>it can. If there's a MIME or UUE attachment it will understand it, and you 
>can save that attachment as a file. I'm looking at ways to reliably 
>transfer header info.

Very interesting outline ... you have been planning :-)

What are you going to code it in ... C ?

>> ... and I guess its an American power supply that you need ?
>
>Yes. I will be doing an ATX -> QL adaptor at some point, but it's a case 
>opening job, so many won't like it. However, ATM I have a QL I can't use, 
>though I understand a PSU is available for me - I just have to contact 
>someone and arrange it.

Well, if you ever visit England I've got lots of them ... that have been
donated to the London Quanta Group.  They are too heavy to economically
post.

-- 
Malcolm Cadman

[ql-users] IFCD and other news!

2002-04-08 Thread Phoebus Dokos


Hi All,
As thanks to Roy I finally have my Aurora back, I will be converting my 
IFCD to run with the Aurora's 256 colours and also will begin work on the 
Aurora modes version of Q-Word.

Preliminary specs for both, include use of Thierry's ATAPI/CD thing/driver 
AND CD-Sound... :-)

Take care all and my apologies for anyone expecting an email answer from me 
as I am TOO EXCITED to write right now :-) Hee hee hee...

Off to play :-)


Phoebus

Re: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 11:14:27, Timothy Swenson wrote:
(ref: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>)

>Tony,
>
>I got some hard copy with the one that Ruth sent me.  I can either photocopy
>and send via snail mail, or I can scan it in and send to you.
  Thanks - a scanned copy would be great, thanks.
-- 
Tony Firshman

[ql-users] EasyPtr

2002-04-08 Thread P Witte


Hiall,

You all know the super EasyPTR suit of programs and utilities from Albin
Hessler? In response to my query, Albin writes that he would be happy
to supply the source code to a person or persons willing to update and
upgrade them! Most of this code is written in assembler with comments
in German. I dont know what arrangement is envisioned, as this is still a
commecial program (available from JMS). If you are interested, please
get in touch with Albin yourself (If you dont already have his email
address you can mail me privately for it, or to pass on a message). I
really hope that there is someone with the time, inclination and ability to
take on this task. I myself would be willing to do something for the
(English) manual, if wanted.

If the "QL" is to survive we need a steady supply of new programs. To
realise that, we need good tools! EasyPTR is such a tool. We cannot afford
to let it become obsolete!

If you already know what EasyPTR is and the issues involved, please skip to
my sig right now ;)

EasyPTR is a suit of tools to help build Pointer Environment-enabled (PE)
programs. EasyMenu lets you interactively create the program screens, with
pop-up and pull-down menus, buttons, sprites and other components. The
alternative is to write Window Definitions in assembler, or more clumsily
but a wee bit more simply, with the Qptr toolkit by TT. The objects thus
created can be manipulated from S*Basic, C and assembler, thanks to
libraries of functions for these languages. Run-time libraries are available
for inclusion in your programs - free for free programs, and for a miniscule
unit fee for commercial ones. EasySprite allows the easy creation of
sprites, blobs and patterns, while other programs and toolkits help with
managing the various objects and components in various ways. In other
words: EasyPTR is an essential utility for producing PE programs for the
QL accross all platforms!

However, EasyPTR is getting a bit long in the tooth. There are a few bugs
that need sorting out and, although the output is compatible with all
current
Qdos/Smsq versions there are issues with  some  EasyPtr components on later
versions of Smsq/E. Finally, when PE has been upgraded to handle the new
colour modes, EasyPTR will require and extensive revamp to cope with them
too. This could be a major undertaking.

No self-respecting Tinkerer should be without EasyPTR!


Per

Re: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk

2002-04-08 Thread Timothy Swenson


Tony,  

I got some hard copy with the one that Ruth sent me.  I can either photocopy
and send via snail mail, or I can scan it in and send to you.

Tim Swenson
___
Free Domain Name Registration with Web Hosting at Lanset Communications.
56k Dialup, Web Design, and Colocation at http://www.lanset.net

Re: [ql-users] Source Code Status

2002-04-08 Thread Richard Zidlicky

On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:34:31AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>  (soundforge)
> > you don't have to, but there is nothing in the copyright statement
> > that would forbid anyone from keeping an inofficial mirror on Sourceforge
> > or wherever. Your paragraph 5 appears to allow that explicitly.
> 
> It will be there.

don't say it will be open source then - it won't. Forget those 
who have seen this as a great chance for SMSQ.

I don't say it has to be GPL, but this doesn't make it.

TT was ready to make available his treasure for *free* - and this 
is what comes out. Really pretty.. there was so little missing 
to make this a perfect world. Instead it turns into disaster.

You may be surprised that I perceive the situation so negative,
it is because I assume we can hardly expect TT to do any work
on SMSQ in the future and I am now pretty curious to see who
who will work for free under this license.

Richard

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Source Code, general

2002-04-08 Thread Richard Zidlicky


On Mon, Apr 08, 2002 at 09:34:31AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

Hi,

> Thank you all for your patience whilst waiting for me to read and  
> digest all of your comments. I hope most of your concerns will be  
> addessed below. I now have had enough time to read all your  replies, 
> requests comments and criticisms very carefully. 
> 
> I'll be replying to some emails in particular, to get rid of some  
> points and fears expressed, they are also on this list. This here  
> missive is just to set out the general points. 
> 
> First of all, I must admit that the criticisms were less sharp than I  
> feared that some might be, which indicates, broadly speaking, a  
> general agreement with most of the principles set out earlier, if not  
> necessarily with the implemenation of them. 

probably wrong. It indicates that the provisorial license was so badly
formulated that everyone found his loophole in it and was happy.
 
> I have more or less amalgamated all of your comments and  criticisms, 
> to avoid having to reply to each e-mail individually. I  hope you all 
> dont mind. If I have forgotten to reply to a particular  point you 
> have made, please let me know.  
> 
> Before I start out, I would just like to define the words original  
> sources. These are the sources of SMSQ/E as I shall (hopefully  soon) 
> get them from Tony Tebby. Official sources are those  distributed by 
> the registrat, which comprise the original sources  and any 
> modifications/additions that will hopefully be made. 
> 
> Before going into the details, I want, agan, to stress a point. A  
> pretty high degree of control has been retained over what will be an  
> official release and what will not be. Many people have objected to  
> some aspect or other of this control. Please be aware that this  wasnt 
> done because I, or anybody else, is a control freak, nor that  I, or 
> anybody else, revels in the power  that control supposedly gives us. 
> I am really concerned about  the fragmentation of SMSQE. There are 
> already 3 QDOS  related systems out there: 
> - QDOS and QDOS Classic (as available on the Q40/Q60) 
> - Mineva 
> - SMSQ/E. 
> If we split this up even further, we will only divide our  community 
> even further, getting to the point where there will be  programs that 
> run only on one machne, and only on one OS on  that machine. THAT IS 
> SOMETHING WE MUST  ABSOLUTELY AVOID.

the point is that with a usable licence you could have cured the
split between Minerva, QDOS Classic (technically unrelated to QDOS)
and SMSQ. With this license you only avoid new splits and new 
development in this one branch

I will happilly contribute to whatever SMSQ alternatives there are.
 
> MOREOVER: 
> When you submit your additions/modifications, you may tell me  whether 
> they are to be : 
> - distributed as part of the official release source code and binaries, 
>  which means that anybody can have a look at them, or 
> - distributed only as part of the official release binaries, that way  
> you keep your source secret (except from the registrar). 

what about source only?

> As a personal note, I must add that this latter option is not  
> completely to my liking, but concern about it was very clearly  
> expressed in some quaters, so this option had to be included. I  
> personally would prefer every change to be included in the source  as 
> well, but that's life. 

no problem as long as the thing works without that part. If it doesn't
I don't want it. I have the disassembly already now, there is nothing
I would gain from such a license.
People can sell their stuff separately if they want to sell it.

> The reason I don't like this "secrecy clause" so much is, again,  
> coherence. Suppose any author make a useful addition to  SMSQ/E, but 
> asks me not to publish the source thereof. I would, of  course, abide 
> by this request. How do I then go about attempting  to get this new 
> feature onto the other machines? 
> 
> Please also note that some parts, which are distributed with  SMSQ/E 
> are not part of SMSQ/E.. This, for example, is the case  of  QPC 
> itself. QPC is the software that (roughly speaking) is the  68K 
> emulator runing under wndows. SMSQ/E runs on top of it.  Neiher Tony 
> Tebby nor mself have any say nor right to QPC itself. 
> 
> 
> Resellers and binaries. 
> 
> This is probably THE thorn in the side of most. Frankly, I  anticipated 
> more problems on other aspects, but the discussions  seem to have 
> focussed on this point. 
> 
> To clarify the situation, this is as follows: 
> 
> Source code: 
> You may get the official release, in source code form only from the  
> registrar, i.e. me. Once you have the source code, you may  compile it, 
> or modify it or add to it. If you want, you can pass your  
> modifications/additions to me (see above), but you dont have to.  You 
> can keep them for yourself (why?). 
> You may also distribute the SOURCE CODE ONLY, provided that  
> -this is

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

On Mon, 8 Apr 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On 27 Mar 2002, at 19:32, Dexter wrote:
> 
> > There are two ways to make money from SMSQ:
> > 1. Be Tony Tebby.
> > 2. ...
> 
> To be quite frank, I resent that comment. the decision the pay TT 
> some money was not his, but was an agreement we came to at 
> Eindhoven. TT has put in an enormous amount of time and money 
> into SMSQ/E, and HAS not gotten back as much as he should.

If you resent that comment, I didn't explain it properly.

Yes, Tony will make a little money from SMSQ. I doubt the resellers will - 
they'll probably cover costs. I was trying to say that some of the money 
should stay with the people that are doing the work - the resellers.

Sorry I caused offense. Case of too big a point expressed in too few words 
?:o)

Dave
ql.spodmail.com

RE: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk

2002-04-08 Thread Norman Dunbar


Tony,

I think I have it in my loft somewhere, but if I remember correctly, it was
nothing more than a couple of sheets of A4. On the other hand, I might have
it in a filing cabinet somewhere, or a drawer, or a floder, or in a 'safe'
place. I'll have a look.

It may also have been on a disc - I'll even check through my discs too.


Cheers,
Nortman.

-
Norman Dunbar
Database/Unix administrator
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: 0113 289 6265
Fax: 0113 289 3146
URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com
-


-Original Message-
From: Tony Firshman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, April 08, 2002 3:54 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


Does anyone have the documentation for the Miracle Hard Disk?
This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and
may be confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not an addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy
it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the
addressees of its existence or contents.  If you have received this email
and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx
Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.

[ql-users] Miracle Hard Disk


Does anyone have the documentation for the Miracle Hard Disk?
-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
   Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Source Code, general

2002-04-08 Thread Joachim Van der Auwera


> -not done via a Website or FTP.
Not a safe way, sourceforge does not (always) use either, but it uses CVS.
To make this safer, change it to "not done electronically, with the
exception of email" or something similar.

Joachim

Re: [ql-users] QL Forum

2002-04-08 Thread Richard Zidlicky

On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 03:21:05PM -0500, Phoebus Dokos wrote:
> ??? 6/4/2002 3:10:11 ìì, ?/? "Bill Waugh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ??:
> >Qpaintshop Pro
> 
> Now why would you want a PaintShop Pro clone on the QL...? Paintshop is one of the 
>worse graphics programs I've ever used (and 
> trust me I know my way around gfx ;-) Now if you told me Photoshop or Fractal Design 
>Painter yeah! I am with you! Heck the GiMP 
> is great as well (No GTK in sight though Unless Thierry is constructively 
>spending his time in the sea ;-)))

I am moderately optimistic about GTK, next version of it is rumored
to be able to run on simple framebuffer devices and that would be very
simple to do in QDOS.
GIMP itself may need a little more than this - for example virtual
memory to be useful.

Richard

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 8 Apr 2002, at 5:07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> Wolfgang,
> 
> Just a slight question - will the sources include the source for SDUMP - this 
> needs updating to support more printers!
> 
Simple reply : I don't know. I've never seen the sources until now, 
so I have NO IDEA what they look like, nor what is in them.  Tony 
is slowly getting ready to assemble them and send them to me.

Wolfgang

[ql-users] Peter Tillier

2002-04-08 Thread Norman Dunbar


Peter,

can you please send me your address (by private reply) so that I can post
the Trump Card to you.

I was in the loft this weekend and found the 'box of bits' and retrieved the
TC - with manual - for you.

Cheers,
Norman.

-
Norman Dunbar
Database/Unix administrator
Lynx Financial Systems Ltd.
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: 0113 289 6265
Fax: 0113 289 3146
URL: http://www.Lynx-FS.com
-
This email is intended only for the use of the addressees named above and
may be confidential or legally privileged.  If you are not an addressee you
must not read it and must not use any information contained in it, nor copy
it, nor inform any person other than Lynx Financial Systems or the
addressees of its existence or contents.  If you have received this email
and are not a named addressee, please delete it and notify the Lynx
Financial Systems IT Department on 0113 2892990.

[ql-users] Q60 software update

2002-04-08 Thread Bruce N


Forwarded on behalf of Wolfgang..


Hi all,

I've has some trouble getting Prowess to work on my Q60. Roy 
also had some problem with this.
This is now solved for me - I downloaded the latest version of the 
binaries from Joachim's site (www.progs.be), and this worked 
nearly straight out of the box. (it is a bit difficult to download them, 
because they don't download directly -it is a file called 
PWS_zip.txt.

The only thing you need to amend is a line in the "startup" file,
which reads as follows:

&wait Prowess

You should simply comment that line out.

As I had some unrelated problems with my harddisk (Q60 : 4 - 
Wolfgang: 0) I ahven't ad time to set this up as I usually do, but, 
e.g. Agenda worked fine.

Hope this helps (notably Roy).

Wolfgang

--


Hi all,

You may have read in QL Today that I had some problems getting 
the QPAC2 jobs menu to run under the Q60. This was due to the 
dreaded 'MOVEP' instruction in there (and in sysmon, too). A 
simple patch took these out. I can make a simpe basic program 
available that patches these. Is anybody interested?.

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

2002-04-08 Thread RWAPSoftware

Wolfgang,

Just a slight question - will the sources include the source for SDUMP - this needs updating to support more printers!

Rich Mellor 
RWAP Software
7 Common Road, Kinsley, Pontefract, West Yorkshire, WF9 5JR
TEL: 01977 614299
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/rwapsoftware

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On  Mon, 8 Apr 2002 at 09:34:31,  wrote:
(ref: <3CB16427.19667.AF2613@localhost>)

>On 27 Mar 2002, at 19:32, Dexter wrote:
>
>> There are two ways to make money from SMSQ:
>> 1. Be Tony Tebby.
>> 2. ...
>
>To be quite frank, I resent that comment. the decision the pay TT
>some money was not his, but was an agreement we came to at
>Eindhoven. TT has put in an enormous amount of time and money
>into SMSQ/E, and HAS not gotten back as much as he should.
Indeed.  If Tony had been getting what he should from SMSQ, then he
would still be developing it.

The whole reason it is OS is that he wasn't.
-- 
 QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255
  tony@,demon.co.uk  http://www.firshman.demon.co.uk
   Voice: +44(0)1442-828254   Fax: +44(0)1442-828255
TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 27 Mar 2002, at 16:19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> okay, i've stayed out of this discussion for a while, although interesting, 
> it seems that some of the points about SMSQ/E have been missed.
> 
> Can someone please send me a copy of the licence for the release of SMSQ/E 
> sources, so I can have a look at this.

No, the licence hans't been done yet.

wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

On 27 Mar 2002, at 19:32, Dexter wrote:

> There are two ways to make money from SMSQ:
> 1. Be Tony Tebby.
> 2. ...

To be quite frank, I resent that comment. the decision the pay TT 
some money was not his, but was an agreement we came to at 
Eindhoven. TT has put in an enormous amount of time and money 
into SMSQ/E, and HAS not gotten back as much as he should.

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

On 26 Mar 2002, at 13:02, Phoebus Dokos wrote:

> I sincerely fail to see the point in this. If you want to protect the 
> vendors, it is indeed EXTREMELY easy to provide protected access on a site 
> and you could give a password to anyone that asks you about it. This way 
> you can still control distribution without restricting people that have 
> difficulty (see for example Lafe) to get the files otherwise...
> 
> Would that be accepted?

I haven't thought much about it.

The thing is : how many people, reaslistically, will want to look at 
the sources to do something about them? 50? (and I believe I'm 
optimistic, here!) Does this justify the entire rigamarole of setting 
up a website for this? I'm not sure.

Do you think this would be justified?

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E Source Code, general

Hi all,

Thank you all for your patience whilst waiting for me to read and digest all of your comments. I hope most of your concerns will be addessed below. I now have had enough time to read all your replies, requests comments and criticisms very carefully.

I'll be replying to some emails in particular, to get rid of some points and fears expressed, they are also on this list. This here missive is just to set out the general points.

First of all, I must admit that the criticisms were less sharp than I feared that some might be, which indicates, broadly speaking, a general agreement with most of the principles set out earlier, if not necessarily with the implemenation of them. I recognize, of course, that some people are not happy at all and, whilst I also recognize that I cant please all people, I still would like to try, even if, as Phoebos Dokos pointed out, this is not necessarily the point of this exercise.

I have more or less amalgamated all of your comments and criticisms, to avoid having to reply to each e-mail individually. I hope you all dont mind. If I have forgotten to reply to a particular point you have made, please let me know.

Before I start out, I would just like to define the words original sources. These are the sources of SMSQ/E as I shall (hopefully soon) get them from Tony Tebby. Official sources are those distributed by the registrat, which comprise the original sources and any modifications/additions that will hopefully be made.

Before going into the details, I want, agan, to stress a point. A pretty high degree of control has been retained over what will be an official release and what will not be. Many people have objected to some aspect or other of this control. Please be aware that this wasnt done because I, or anybody else, is a control freak, nor that I, or anybody else, revels in the power that control supposedly gives us. I am really concerned about the fragmentation of SMSQE. There are already 3 QDOS related systems out there:
- QDOS and QDOS Classic (as available on the Q40/Q60)
- Mineva
- SMSQ/E.
If we split this up even further, we will only divide our community even further, getting to the point where there will be programs that run only on one machne, and only on one OS on that machine. THAT IS SOMETHING WE MUST ABSOLUTELY AVOID.

Hence, the system of a registrar, whose main job, as I perceive it, is to attempt to bully the individual and highly competent!- software authors to work together, so that one change on a machine is at least made in such a way that it also becomes possible on the others. The price for this attempt at coherence is a degree of control. I do not find this unreasonable.

Remember, the PC world has always had the motto divide and conquer. Lets NOT fall into that trap.

Ok, now lets get some of the legalities out of the way.

I know that some part of the future licence, as tentatively set out in the offcial statement, are a bit convoluted, and various persons have pointed out to me that a GPL licence would have been so much easier (especially for me...). That is true, but would have led nowhere, as several other people would simply not hear of it, since they want to retain some control over their own software. And there is the aspect of distributing the binaries, to which I will come later, which also made this impractical..

I also know that, as Timothy Swenson pointed out, the licence as set out in the official statement is much perfectible. Please only remember that the official statement is not the licence, which will be sharpened up a bit. However, I do not propose to make it into the multi page documents used by M$soft et al., for various reasons, one of which is the futility of it all. The licence is there to keep you honest. I cant see anybody really suing over it, unless you want to make YOUR lawyer rich. (If it really came to it, Id probably act as Tonys lawyer, and that would not cost him any money just so you know... (ha!)).

Moreover, if I really want to be perfectly legally coherent, I would have to draw up one licence per country. Ill make it easier, and draw up one licence - and to make it more difficult for you, I may draft it in french... (with an english translation, perhaps). (ha, again!)

Some concern has been voiced (notably by Joachim van der Auwera) about the copyright status of the additions/modifications brought about in the future by various authors to the original sources.

The official statement said the following:
"
Authors retain copyright over their additions/modifications, but when submitting their additions/modifications, they agree that, if they are accepted in any official distribution (under the statements as set out above), the may be included in all other furture distributions (in other words, you can't submit something, which is included, and then some months later attempt to
withdraw it).

Let me clarify this. Copyright of the modifi

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 27 Mar 2002, at 9:24, Phoebus Dokos wrote:

> 1. The copyright for SMSQ/E is retained by Tony Tebby (Nothing weird here, 
> just like Linux)

Agreed.

> 1. There are (currently) two official distributors of LICENSED binaries and 
> ONLY official Distributors can SELL SMSQ/E.

The official resellers are the only source for binaries (unles you 
compile the source yourself).

> 2. The registrar (and only the registrar) is making available the SMSQ/E 
> sources to anyone that wants them free of charge, provided that the person 
> sends return postage in form of IRCs  and Media for the sources to be put 
> on. (See also No. 7 for the contradiction)

OK. The registrar make available the official release version. I 
certify that the version you get from me is the latest official release 
version.
> 3. Any modifications CANNOT be publicised until approved by the registrar
No, untrue. You can give the sources( with your changes) away, if 
this is free of charge etc...
The registrat only cares about inclusion in the official rlease 
versions.

> 4. Any modifications/new code that is  approved and entered in the source 
> loses it's copyright from its author and derives the overall copyright 
> status of SMSQ/E. 

NO, NO, NO.
See my more general explanation.

> (In that aspect, modifications from 3rd parties on the 
> modifications from the 2nd party does not need to include the writer's 
> copyright message/license but only the SMSQ/E license)

> 5. ANYONE CAN create a distribution for his own use from the sources but 
> cannot give it away to no one free of charge or otherwise
Yes, you can give away the sources free of charge NOT the 
binaries.

> 6. It is STRICTLY prohibited for anyone to make the sources available on 
> the internet (unless given specific permission to do so by the registrar or 
> the copyright holder)
yes.

> 7. It is NOT STRICTLY prohibited (but in any case requires prior approval) 
> for a PD library/Shareware catalog/Individual to give away the SMSQ/E 
> sources provided no fee is charged (same as no. 2)
> 

There is no contradictionbetween 2 & 7. You CAN get sources from 
the PD library.BUT they will not be the official release versions - 
these are only available from me.

> Okay that is it Please clarify If I got them right or wrong :-) If No. 
> 7 is right and No. 2 is not, then I do volunteer to distribute the sources 
> in the US, free of charge :-) as well

Ok, I've put you down as somebody to send the official release 
version to...

Oh, by the way:

DON'T HOLD YOUR BREATH. I'm not sure when I'll get the 
sources.
Wolfgang

RE: Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:10, Dexter wrote:

> No offense, Wolfgang, but you don't seem to appreciate the gravity of your 
> statement.

No, I don't.

> Also, I'm not implying end users should be beta testers, just that beta 
> testers shouldn't be required to be programmers too.

Good, at least we see eye to eye on this!

(...)
> There are two kinds of "features" involved. Both need to be handled 
> differently. Soft features, which provide a functionality, API or 
> interface for an application to use ina  consistent manner, are very much 
> the business of the maintainer and at the heart of what he is doing - it 
> is through keeping these consistent that he ensures compatibility.

Again, I agree completely.

> Hard features, which may require changes to the OS to make different 
> hardware look alike to the OS and applications, are much harder for the 
> maintainer to handle. He a) has to have a sample of the hardware, and b) 
> has to have an in-depth knowledge of what changes were necessary to make 
> it happen. Think of the implications. Does the maintainer buy the 
> hardware, or is the developer required to give/loan a prototype to them?

This is where the idea of "key developers" comes in. I can delegate 
those tasks to them!

> *shudders*

same here.

> I don't think I'm going to devil's advocate that particular quandry any 
> more - it's just getting too frightening persuing the ramifications...

No, I can use all the help I can get so that we can hammer 
something out!

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:31, Phoebus Dokos wrote:

> Hey I have no problem with providing support on this but I don't see how 
> many "sales" SMSQ/E would have in the US (apart from the few upgrades). 
> That would be just a convenience service to the community rather than a 
> "business" :-)
That is very probable.
Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:56, Dexter wrote:
(...)
> If a user already has a licensed copy of SMSQ, a developer should be 
> entitled to include the modified or updated version at no cost to the 
> user. This should be true for same version groups only - eg an upgrade 
> from 2.X to 3.X would be chargeable but from 2.2 to 2.3 would not.
> 
> Thoughts?

This does seem reasonable, even though, this is not true as things 
stand now. Normally, a user is entitled to a "free" new version, if 
the previous version contains a bug that makes his version 
unuseable.

All other versions are paid for. But I think something can be worked 
out - we only have to look at how thngs are being handled right now.

Wolfgang

RE: Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms


On 27 Mar 2002, at 16:56, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

>
> Might be an idea to get the licensing biz wrapped up before TT decides 
> to take the toys away again.  Just an idea.

it has happened before, but won't now.

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] Source Code Status


On 26 Mar 2002, at 21:58, Richard Zidlicky wrote:

> > No, compiled versions can only be obtained via the official 
> > resellers. HW vendors have to get a licence now, too..
> 
> if there is a way for them to get the license.

Yes, sure there is - why shouldn't they become resellers?


(testing problems)
This is one point I'lm taking more time on. But you WILL get a 
reply.


> People surely won't buy SMSQ merely to save the work of compiling
> it themselves, they will probably buy it to get manuals and
> added services (SMSQ hotlines ?;).

Some will, some won't.The fact is that if people can get binaries for 
free, they will - AND then badger the resellers for advice.

YES THEY WILL!

> Obstruction doesn't work well 
> as access control and 99% of the cases will cause more trouble to 
> the good guys then to simple thieves.

I agree. But then, we're not concerned that much about the thieves, 
but the vast majority of people who are honest. And, withing the QL 
community -as it is now- people are honest.
 (soundforge)
> you don't have to, but there is nothing in the copyright statement
> that would forbid anyone from keeping an inofficial mirror on Sourceforge 
> or wherever. Your paragraph 5 appears to allow that explicitly.

It will be there.

Bye
Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] SMSQ/E license criticisms

On 26 Mar 2002, at 18:01, Dexter wrote:

This is a reply to some concerns raised by Dexter on the future  
Licence. Please read my more general reply first.

(very large snip)

> Let me explain how this restriction relates to me, and how it makes SMSQ/E 
> unusable to me. This is a real world case.

This is a great example!

> I am developing an ARM-based microcomputer, in the traditional sense. It 
> will be a single board, with all the interfaces built in. It will fit the 
> QL form factor, and could fit in a QL case. It will need an OS, and parts 
> of that OS will need to be optimized or even replaced to make the code run 
> more quickly and 'safely' on uQLx, and with parts of the code being 
> converted to native ARM assembly. I would have to submit my sources, which 
> would imemdiately become publicly available whether I like it or not, 

Two replies here:

1/
You DO NOT HAVE TO SUBMIT YOUR SOURCES. I very much 
encourage you to do so, but you do not have to. BUT, only source 
submitted to me will be part of the official release versions.

2 / Even if you do submit your sources to me, they can be kept 
secret (except from me). See the more general reply for this.

> and 
> which may not even be accepted. If they are not accepted, there is no way 
> for me to use those modifications under the license.

That is true.

> I would have to 
> contact TT or yourself and negotiate the right to distribute, which would 
> likely be declined as causing a code branch. 

Yes, this possibility exists. However, all I can say is that we are 
pretty reasonable. If you make a specific version of SMSQ/E for a 
very specific hardware, I fail to see why there should not be an 
official release version for that machine (with one proviso). You 
could be a reseller for SMSQ/E for that machine - and there you 
have it.
The proviso mentioned above is that, if it is perceived that, ON 
PURPOSE, you make your version of SMSQ/E incompatible to the 
others, then I'd probably refuse to accept it. I don't know why 
anybody would do such a thing, but human nature being as it is...

>I would just talk to Lau and use Minerva if that was the case. 

I hope your fears are dispelled.

> I appreciate you want a co-ordinated 
> road, but this rule doesn't just give a co-ordinated road, it gives no 
> other roads whatsoever allowed for any commercial development whatsoever.

This I don't agree with that, of course. The problem with control over 
anything is always that, to be effective, the control must be total, at 
least potentially. It is up to you (or me, in this case), to use this 
reasonably. I can't do more than assure you that this will be the 
case.

> No, this usually isn't the case in my experience. In this project there 
> would be 2-3 developers/coders, and 4-5 others who would be beta testers. 
> Firmware would initially be tested by the developers/coders, and once 
> everything looks ok, the 4-5 non-paying testers would use the equipment, 
> normally, and would find any interactions with other hardware/software 
> that the three developers just do not have the time/equipment/range of 
> hardware/combinations to do.

The testing issue will be addressed in the short future.

> Any law has to be convenient in a society that people don't have to put 
> themselves out to obey it. This is why everybody speeds and nobody robs 
> banks... If the rule is just too inconvenient, people will ignore, 
> circumvent or just make it irrelevant by using something else.

To be quite frank : shudder. Ok, this is a bit OT, but, if you DO 
speed, and DO cause harm to anybody because of this, you WILL 
be punished. I know that people will always take shortcuts, but I've 
also heard people justify a bank robbery by saying that, after all, 
banks are insured and that nobody "really" loses any money when 
the bank is robbed.
Needless to say, there again, I don't agree - but I DO see your 
point!

> Wolfgang, consider this a test. Like I said, this is *mostly* devil's 
> advocate, though one rule does affect me so negatively it rules SMSQ out 
> for a project I am doing. If the criticisms are voiced, the concerns 
> raised, the issues discussed and reasoned and if necessary modifications 
> made, everyone benefits.

Yes!

I'm not sure I passed the test, except for one aspect, i.e. that I try 
to reply to each concern, as it is voiced, in a civilized manner. I 
took my time doing it, but that, I hope, is OK.

> I would like to see this conversation remain as light as it is now. If it 
> gets vitriolic, I shall withdraw, as that isn't constructive. So far, 
> we're all doing really great :o)
> 
Entirely agreed!

Wolfgang

Re: [ql-users] Source Code Status