Ah ok, I misunderstood then. When you said it'll spare you the effort of continuous maintenance, I thought you meant further work/whatever will be based off of zopen stuff.
Of course, RS can't offer support for zopen content directly. Well... giving back as in more than star-ing a repo. Keeping the supply chain sustainable. I'm seeing quite a bit of zopen patches being accepted upstream. But I do know what you mean... there are some projects/orgs that don't want to accept patches without having access to h/w where they can test/run those patches on. >> Comfort? That's hardly the case. > no responsible IT manager would be at ease without... In other words... comfort, albeit for a professional setting. I didn't use that word in a derogatory manner. It is what it is. Supported open source is certainly not a "must". It's just far more common/expected in the mainframe world. ... which is hilarious; it was the mainframe ecosystem that was originally open (I'm assuming)... with CBT etc. - KB ------- Original Message ------- On Monday, August 21st, 2023 at 13:57, David Crayford <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 21 Aug 2023, at 1:35 pm, kekronbekron > > [email protected] wrote: > > > > > I intend to leverage the z/OS Open Tools ports as they spare me the > > > effort of continuous maintenance. > > > > That sounds like it's going to lead to RS offering supported option of > > stuff, relying on other people's open sourced work... with what amount of > > giving back involved? > > > There is zero chance of RS offering commercial support for code ported by the > z/OS Open Tools community. They don’t need to. If they thought there was a > market for a tool that they would just provide their own port. > > I’m not quite sure what you mean by “giving back”? If you’re talking about > upstreaming changes then we’ve had this conversation before many times. The > maintainers of open source projects, such as Python, want nothing to do with > z/OS patches in their mainline code. That’s why IBM and Rocket keep their own > patch files. > > > In other words, what's the value add apart from the comfort of support, and > > the SMP/E install option? > > > Comfort? That's hardly the case. Deploying anything into production without > proper support is unheard of. If you're just a casual enthusiast downloading > development tools for personal use, that's one thing. However, when an > organization aims to adopt Git for managing critical source code, no > responsible IT manager would be at ease without round-the-clock support. This > principle applies universally, encompassing mainframes and all systems alike. > Support is a must, either directly from the product vendor or through > services provided by specialized organizations. As an example, consider > enterprise Linux distributions like RHEL, which are predominantly constructed > from open source software. RedHat (now IBM) or SUSE stands behind them, > delivering essential support. Same for cloud operators. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
