Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!watdragon!dvadura From: dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo Subject: Re: APR's and patches Message-ID: <13266@watdragon.waterloo.edu> Date: 12 Apr 89 20:42:03 GMT References: <13047@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <331@tim.UUCP> Reply-To: dvadura@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Dennis Vadura) Organization: Computer Science Dept., University of Waterloo Lines: 64 In article <331@tim.UUCP> tim@tim.UUCP (Tim Giebelhaus) writes: >... >1) Would this be a valid (not for profit) use of the Internet? As long as Apollo does not charge for them I do not see how this is an inappropriate use of the internet. [A related discussion has been recently held in comp.ibm.pc.d (i think that's the group) concerning the issue of posting shareware binaries, and binaries that illicit money from their users in various ways. There the discussion seemed to go in favour of posting such binaries if the moderator perceived them to be of general benefit to the user community at large ] Since we are not advocating posting of patches, rather just making them available for people to ftp them from Apollo, this situation is a little different but still similar. My point is that making the patches available is a service to the Apollo users at large that is generally perceived (in my opinion) as beneficial since it makes their Apollo equipment more usable as bugs get fixed. >2) This would make patches available to people who do not pay for > service (perhaps raising the cost to those who do pay). You've hit a sore spot with me. I believe in a supplier standing by their product. To me this means that if you release SR10.x and you ask me to pay money to get that release, I should get patches to that release free of charge (perhaps this is too naive a view on my part, but hey, when an automaker makes a car, and recalls it because the brakes are faulty, ALL SUCH CARS ARE FIXED FREE OF CHARGE TO THE OWNER!). This does not mean that I should get the next OS release free of charge, but patches to the current release that I paid for should be free. Apollo is free to create a new release at any time, and thereby pay for the next set of patches. >3) It would make patches difficult to control. That is, patches > are dangerous as they are not fully tested. Installing many God I hope not! If I get a patch from Apollo I expect it to work, and fix the problem, not create a new one! If there is danger of a patch not working, then DON'T ISSUE IT! >There are other issues also. This does not mean Apollo will or >will not make their patches available via ftp. It is still >being discussed. > >There is a system which I have refered to before which will help >find out what is available via patches, though. This is the >new bulletin board. The bulletin board will make all sorts of >information available in a more timely fashion. As I have said >before, please contact your local office for more information. Convenience is also an important. The fact is that the internet is convenient to use, easy to access, and I don't need a modem, all I need is my thin ether connector. If I had to call a BBS from my office I can't do it, since I don't have a modem, and even if I did, our phone switch does not like modems (much!). The internet is far, far, far more conveninent to access patches, and to know what is broken. -anyway, I have a squash game :-) -dennis -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 90% of all the scientists that ever |Dennis UUCP,BITNET: dvadura@water lived are alive today! Surprised? |Vadura EDU,CDN,CSNET: dvadura@waterloo ================================================================================