Wolfgang (and list), Because I have the distinct feeling that I am going to be misunderstood (once more... :-), let me also clarify some things.
1. As we in Greece (and in the US as well ;-) say, "if you are given a horse, you don't look it at its teeth"... by that I mean that opening up the SMSQ/E sources is a great development in itself and I welcome it with great pleasure, but I also would like to dissent in a civilised manner (hmmm civilised and Greek at the same sentence :-) 2. There are (as Dave and me among others) some differences between what you originally said and your clarifications UNLESS I didn't understand you completely 3. The details of distribution esp. to cover people with no other means of getting the software using IRCs instead of money (if they CANNOT get the IRCs in the first place), need to be "cleared" up a little bit. Open means open and not quasi-open (Open to people ABLE to get it in the method described but not to people lacking that ability - This is discriminatory in a way and I am absolutely against ANYTHING discriminatory...). In this sense we are creating two categories of QLers, the ones that can get SMSQ/E's sources and the ones that aren't allowed because they have no means to do it... - Please Wolfgang, find some better way to do this. I am willing to help in this aspect (as you can see from my other emails). 4. Contradictions between the text you originally submitted and your clarifications must be eliminated :-) 5. ESPECIALLY for hardware designers, I think that a provision should be made so they will be able to distribute some form of binaries (especially in ROMS) to avoid the problems vividly illustrated in QL-Developers by Peter (You do read that list don't you?). Unless of course again I didn't understand something right. In any case we cannot argue that this isn't one of the most significant developments in the QL just shy of the announcement of Colour drivers! That's all... and I hope I am clearer now :-) Phoebus
