You had it right the first time.  This second way has a double negative!

But I knew what you ment :-)


On 8/23/05, James Gray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I made a typo.  I left out the word "not".!!!  I meant to write:
> That said, I think it
>  needs to not be changed in ways that will not break VistA.
> 
> Jim Gray
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "James Gray" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[email protected]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 10:09 AM
> Subject: Re: [Hardhats-members] MUMPS and VistA ( more M read questions)
> 
> 
> >I want to say that I agree very much with what you are saying here, 
> >especially that the language needs to move forward.  That said, I think it
> 
> >needs to not be changed in ways that will break VistA.  I also think we 
> >need to accept that the language is going to move forward in a different 
> >way than having a resurected MDC.  What needs to move forward also is both
> 
> >the SAC and the Kernel to allow ways to use the language extensions 
> >available in GTM and Cache.  I wonder if the community is ideologically 
> >opposed to moving the language forward or just stuck on the idea that there
> 
> >is only one way to move it forward.
> >
> > Jim Gray
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "Greg Woodhouse" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > To: <[email protected]>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 9:42 AM
> > Subject: [Hardhats-members] MUMPS and VistA ( more M read questions)
> >
> >
> >>I actually didn't know that MUMPS_V1 was (now) open source. Originally,
> >> I was looking for a version of MUMPS that I could run under Windows
> >> but, as I recall, the developer was adamant that it not be ported to
> >> Windows, so it was of no real use to me. Since then, I've decided to
> >> use OS X as my primary operating system, so that may not be an issue.
> >> But as I said before, ther are other things I'm interested in doing
> >> right now. My opinion is that MUMPS is an underappreciated language,
> >> and I believe that it is in the long term best interest of the MUMPS
> >> community to move the language forward. I also believe it is feasible
> >> to do so, but the community seems almost ideologically opposed to this
> >> course. The argument is framed as one of "practicality" or of "saving
> >> VistA", but I don't think marrying ourselves to the existing code base
> >> without providing a way forward is saving VistA. At best, it's getting
> >> a product out the door.
> >>
> >> --- Jim Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>>  Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> >>> >--- Jim Self <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Greg Woodhouse wrote:
> >>> >> >Off hand, I don't know, but members of this list do seem to have
> >>> a
> >>> >> >tendency to "plug" GT.M (presumably because it is open source).
> >>> >> >Personally, I think we'd all benefit from a little more vendor
> >>> >> >neutrality.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> I am not a vendor and neither is GT.M.
> >>> >
> >>> >No, but Fidelity is.
> >>>
> >>> If you know my history, then you should know that I advocate Free
> >>> MUMPS, not vendors. You
> >>> do not buy a license for GT.M/Linux from a vendor. You download it
> >>> from Sourceforge or get
> >>> it from a friend.
> >>>
> >>> >Open source may be a
> >>> >good thing (and I think it is), but is it being touted because it's
> >>> the
> >>> >"right" way to do things or because it's the cheapest?
> >>>
> >>> I don't know of any serious advocate of Open Source or Free software
> >>> who doesn't primarily
> >>> believe that it is the right way (and perhaps ultimately the only
> >>> way) to develop and
> >>> promote open standards for computing and the knowledge that we need
> >>> (widespread and deep)
> >>> to develop and maintain secure and reliable computing and
> >>> communications systems in the
> >>> long term.
> >>>
> >>> >> At the moment, GT.M is the only Free (Open Source) MUMPS
> >>> >> implementation that has been
> >>> >> taken seriously enough by VistA developers to make VistA work on
> >>> it.
> >>> >
> >>> >Perhaps so. But reason may only be that it has become something of a
> >>> >juggernaut -- people put their efforts into GT.M because that is
> >>> where
> >>> >other people are putting their efforts,
> >>>
> >>> MUMPS_V1 was freely available for a good while before GT.M was
> >>> released for Linux, but
> >>> unfortunately, MUMPS_V1 was only free, not Free (Open Source) until
> >>> some time after
> >>> attention had shifted to GT.M. Before that I worked with it and
> >>> tested it repeatedly for
> >>> conformance to the MUMPS standards and talked it up on this list and
> >>> elsewhere as a
> >>> serious effort at implementing standard MUMPS that was worthy of
> >>> serious attention. It
> >>> still is.
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------
> >>> Jim Self
> >>> Systems Architect, Lead Developer
> >>> VMTH Computer Services, UC Davis
> >>> (http://www.vmth.ucdavis.edu/us/jaself)
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ===
> >> Gregory Woodhouse  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>
> >> "Design quality doesn't ensure success, but design failure can ensure 
> >> failure."
> >>
> >> --Kent Beck
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -------------------------------------------------------
> >> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> >> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle 
> >> Practices
> >> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & 
> >> QA
> >> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement *
> http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Hardhats-members mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
> >
> >
> >
> > -------------------------------------------------------
> > SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> > September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle 
> > Practices
> > Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing &
> QA
> > Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> > _______________________________________________
> > Hardhats-members mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members 
> 
> 
> 
> -------------------------------------------------------
> SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
> September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
> Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
> Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
> _______________________________________________
> Hardhats-members mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
>


-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is Sponsored by the Better Software Conference & EXPO
September 19-22, 2005 * San Francisco, CA * Development Lifecycle Practices
Agile & Plan-Driven Development * Managing Projects & Teams * Testing & QA
Security * Process Improvement & Measurement * http://www.sqe.com/bsce5sf
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members

Reply via email to