I might want to give them criticize them in private. I might want to praise them in public. I might want to invite them to speak at SHARE. I might want to pick their brains. If I meet them at a conference, I might want to spend some time chatting with them.
In other words, it puts a human face on an otherwise anonymous work. I guess I'm so used to just about everything related to Linux/390 coming from IBM in the form of Redbooks/pieces/papers, etc., that it strikes me as odd when I don't know who did the work. I know that prior to Linux/390 coming along, I never really wondered who wrote the Messages and Codes manuals, for example. But since I've been in the middle of this since nearly the beginning, I feel like I "know" most everyone involved, and that's really nice. I never had that feeling before when doing MVS work. As time goes on, I suppose we'll see more and more things from IBM's internal writers, so I'll probably have to get used to it. I'll probably be a little sad about it, though. Mark Post -----Original Message----- From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Alan Altmark Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2005 8:50 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Linux 2.4 to 2.6 Transition Guide On Monday, 03/28/2005 at 06:44 EST, "Post, Mark K" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm looking at it now. I hate it when IBM publishes something like this, > and doesn't give any indication as to who the author(s) is/are. The writing > looks vaguely familiar. Anyone we know write this? Of what value is that information, Mark? Alan Altmark z/VM Development IBM Endicott ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390
