"This really needs to be core VM function" ...
David,
Let me reiterate that comment as I understand it, because I think it's
possible to interpret the scope of what you mean by, "Core VM function" i
n
different ways - and it's a definition that we need to agree upon if we'r
e
to have a fruitful discussion.
In my view, the, "Core VM Function" that IBM has to buy into is the
provision of an API in CP that allows the creation of an RDEV of any kind
("take, "any" with a pinch of salt - hopefully it could be architeched to
do, "any" in principle but maybe limited for practical/business reasons t
o
(say) tape and DASD on its first outing) together with the supporting API
that allows communication between the created RDEV and a Service Virtual
Machine. Again, I cite *CCS as the conceptual model.
Personally, I DO NOT see (and, if I read you correctly, neither do you)
the provision of the server code that drives this API as part of the "Cor
e
VM Function" that IBM needs to buy into. While I can see that IBM might
well wish to take advantage of the API and deliver function that is based
on the API I am also certain that there are entrepreneurs across the whol
e
spectrum from Open-Sourcers to Proprietary OCOers who would gladly grab
the opportunity to provide all kinds of arcane and esoteric device suppor
t
base upon the aforesaid, "Core VM Function".
As I said earlier, I believe that this is just a re-statement and
clarification of the scope that you already subscribe to but - if not the
n
at least, with your reply, we're likely all to be definitely talking abou
t
the same thing.
Pardon my pedantry.
Regards
Jeff
