at
license?
If we can get enough folks involved and committed, this could happen in
a short time frame.
- Original Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Well hell . . .
O
on behalf of
> chuck5566
> Sent: Wed 4/13/2005 8:30 PM
> To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
> When I say client on the Mac, I was thinking mainly of porting the
> Kernel and Fileman Broker tools from
] Boston wrap-up.
When I say client on the Mac, I was thinking mainly of porting the
Kernel and Fileman Broker tools from Delphi to something on OS X, for
starters. I don't think anything would need to be done to GT.M to make
this happen, would it?
On Apr 13, 2005, at 8:13 AM, Bhaska
- Original Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Yes you can! I believe the more platforms, the merrier.
On Apr 13, 2005, at 7:23 AM, Chris Richardson wrote:
OK, Chuck, So ar
s not designed to be totally complete.
Best wishes; Chris
- Original Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Wednesday, April 13, 2005 5:41 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Yes you can! I believe the more platforms, the merrier.
D]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Agree wholeheartedly, Chris. I would suggest:
1st - Determining that level of interest, and where it's at.
Are people really interested in a GT.M for OS X,
When I say client on the Mac, I was thinking mainly of porting the
Kernel and Fileman Broker tools from Delphi to something on OS X, for
starters. I don't think anything would need to be done to GT.M to make
this happen, would it?
On Apr 13, 2005, at 8:13 AM, Bhaskar, KS wrote:
A port to Mac
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 11:46 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
>
>
> Agree wholeheartedly, Chris. I would suggest:
>
> 1st - Determining that level of interest, and where it's at.
>
lient level (CPRS
Chart), or both?
/David.
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chris
Richardson
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 8:28 AM
To: hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Chuck;
I spoke wit
On Wed, 2005-04-13 at 01:46 -0500, chuck5566 wrote:
> Agree wholeheartedly, Chris. I would suggest:
>
> 1st - Determining that level of interest, and where it's at.
> Are people really interested in a GT.M for OS X,
> or would clients on OS X that coul
Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Well hell . . .
On Apr 11, 2005, at 5:03 PM, Bhaskar, KS wrote:
> Thanks for the clarification, Maury. Yes, Fidelity will be off
nough folks involved and committed, this could
happen in a
short time frame.
- Original Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 9:00 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Well hell . . .
On Apr 11, 2005, at 5:03 P
OK, Chuck, So are you still interested? Do we count you as the first to
want GT.M on Apple?
Chris
- Original Message -
From: "chuck5566" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 11:46 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Agree wholehear
t GT.M version. Institutions
> >> will have a choice which version they want based on their needs and
> >> the performance specs.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >> From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTEC
It seems to me that there are two different aspects to porting GTM to
OS X. On is, of course, the database and (not having seen the source) I
would expect this to be reasonably straightforward. But the PowerPC
architecture is quite a bit different from the Pentium, and porting the
compiler would pr
--
From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Cc: "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:31 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
Ignacio, I think it will be ported to the MAC, not Oracle. At the
meeting I
heard two programm
al Message -
From: "Bhaskar, KS" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Monday, April 11, 2005 3:03 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
> Thanks for the clarification, Maury. Yes, Fidelity will be offering
> Oracle (and perhaps DB2 someday) as an alternative database for o
Well, those of you who know me know that I'M happier than a pig in poop
to read this!:-)
A little tidbit:
Not too long ago, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
(UIUIC) replaced their 208-node Linux-based system with a 640-node
Apple Xserve system. UIUC is where the graphic Web b
Chris Richardson wrote:
>Is GT.M Open Source, ported
>onto OS X, still Open Source when it is run on OS X? Or is it that
>licensing is now owed to Fidelity (it isn't the X86 architecture any more)?
It seems clear to me that if the port was based entirely on the GNU GPL source
for GT.M
for Linux/
Bhaskar wrote:
>I don't recollect anything from the VistA Community Meeting about GT.M
>being ported to Mac OS X by anyone in the user community. Except for
>running it on Linux in an emulated PC, porting to Mac OS X from the open
>source port to x86 GNU/Linux would be a non-trivial effort.
If an
is it that
licensing is now owed to Fidelity (it isn't the X86 architecture any more)?
;^)
Best wishes; Chris
- Original Message -
From: "Jim Self" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 4:54 PM
Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
d database
> along with the current GT.M version. Institutions
> will have a choice which version they want based on
> their needs and the performance specs.
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL
sage -
> From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Cc: "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
>
>
> > Ignacio, I think it will be ported to
; > - Original Message -
> > From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To:
> > Cc: "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:31 PM
> > Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
> >
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Cc: "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005 11:31 PM
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] Boston wrap-up.
>
>
>> Ignac
nt GT.M version. Institutions will have a choice which version they
want based on their needs and the performance specs.
- Original Message -
From: "Nancy Anthracite" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Cc: "Ignacio Valdes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, April 10, 2005
Yes...but it's a hope and not a plan as Nancy said.and
definitely not Oracle.
Joseph
Ignacio Valdes wrote:
Would that be Mac OS X? -- IV
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:31:29 -0400
Nancy Anthracite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ignacio, I think it will be ported to the MAC, not Oracle. At the
Would that be Mac OS X? -- IV
On Mon, 11 Apr 2005 00:31:29 -0400
Nancy Anthracite <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ignacio, I think it will be ported to the MAC, not Oracle. At the
meeting I
heard two programmers had done it a few years ago and no longer
have their
code, so the hope is to do it ag
Hello all,
With the gracious help of Nancy Anthracite and without benefit of
actually attending the Boston meeting, I have created this summary of
the meeting:
http://www.linuxmednews.com/linuxmednews/1113172411/index_html
If there are major announcements and discussions that I did not
include,
Ignacio, I think it will be ported to the MAC, not Oracle. At the meeting I
heard two programmers had done it a few years ago and no longer have their
code, so the hope is to do it again.
On Sunday 10 April 2005 07:54 pm, Jim Self wrote:
> Ignacio,
> In the article you wrote: "announcement th
Ignacio,
In the article you wrote: "announcement that GT.M will be ported to Oracle".
Is that an error? If not, what does it mean?
Ignacio wrote:
>Hello all,
>
>With the gracious help of Nancy Anthracite and without benefit of
>actually attending the Boston meeting, I have created this summary of
31 matches
Mail list logo
