Greg -- Normally, you are objective and reasoned. On this post, however, I regret that I have several bones to pick with you. See below.
-- Bhaskar On Tue, 2005-12-20 at 13:14 -0600, Greg Woodhouse wrote: > --- Ronald Ponto <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Which would go more support on this forum Cache on WIndows, OR > GT-M? > > How > > would I get GT-M? > > > > The list does seem to have a preponderance of GT.M users, but VOE > runs [KSB] How I wish this were the case! Owing to the number of VA users and the extensive use of non-GT.M implementations of MUMPS within the VA, and owing to VOE, I think GT.M users are probably in a non-trivial minority. > on Cache' not GT.M. Ironically, I might be more ready to use GT.M if > the list didn't seem so lop-sided on the GT.M side. I don't have an [KSB] It is probably a fair statement to say that there are more newbie users of VistA on GT.M on this forum (and of course newbie users need more help and are more vocal than non-newbie users; besides people ask questions where they find their questions are answered). > infinite amount of time, and certainly can't do everything I'd like, > but I think it would be very nice to see a portable implementation > that > could be distributed with VistA installed (even if not completely > configured). I am not at all happy with the way Linux seems to be the > only OS that anyone wants to use for development. Again, I think I > might be a bit more friendly to Linux if there were more of a balance > (and if the distribution weren't so "kute"). [KSB] Since I don't have the right to distribute Windows, or OS X, the choice comes down to Linux and *BSD variants. I really don't have a strong personal preference between them. However since (a) I already had a GT.M on Linux, and (b) Linux live CDs came before *BSD live CDs, I chose to release VistA on Linux. I felt that it was better to do what little I could even if I couldn't do everything. > Sorry this is turning into such a soapbox type message, but I think > the > community really needs to focus on supporting at least Linux, > FreeBSD, > OS X and Windows. I know the last two are commercial operating > systems > (though support for OpenDarwin would be really nice, too), but > shouldn't the focus be on making *VistA* available, not on promoting > the use of Linux? [KSB] A minor point, but your post suggests that Linux is not a commercial operating system. Open source free software like Linux and GT.M on Linux are very much commercial software. Only, the licensing terms are different, and the GPL gives the licensee more Freedom than traditional software licenses (see http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html for more an essay on the topic). For the record, I feel strongly enough about the importance of VistA that I have offered more than once at the VistA Community Meetings and the VistA Community Calls to teach anyone interested, including InterSystems, how to create a live CD of VistA on Cache. The offer still stands. As President Kennedy said, "ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country." An old Chinese proverb says that it is better to light a candle than to curse the darkness. Why get on a soapbox about what other people are doing when they have done you no harm? If you feel strongly about VistA on FreeBSD, why not turn your energies to do something positive? I will gladly render what assistance I can for you to get VistA running on a FreeBSD live CD. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Do you grep through log files for problems? Stop! Download the new AJAX search engine that makes searching your log files as easy as surfing the web. DOWNLOAD SPLUNK! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7637&alloc_id=16865&op=click _______________________________________________ Hardhats-members mailing list Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
