Path: utzoo!dciem!nrcaer!scs!spl1!laidbak!att!pacbell!ames!killer!tness7!bellboy!hack
From: hack@bellboy.UUCP (Greg Hackney)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.elm
Subject: Re: Elm, the newsgroup from hell
Message-ID: <1081@bellboy.UUCP>
Date: 3 Jun 88 00:10:54 GMT
Article-I.D.: bellboy.1081
References: <1022@bellboy.UUCP> <2998@s.cc.purdue.edu> <1029@bellboy.UUCP> <2019@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM>
Reply-To: hack@bellboy.UUCP (Greg Hackney)
Organization: home
Lines: 35

In article <2019@hplabsz.HPL.HP.COM> davis@hplabs.hp.com (Jim Davis) writes:
 
>    I have noticed at least one offer of Elm 2.0 gamma on the net.
>I should point out that this source has "leaked" and is probably
>well worth scarfing up.  (Dave did not leak it, nor did I.)
>				-- Jim Davis

I recall a posting that Dave made saying that he hoped to
make Elm 2.0 available to the public, after he had removed some
recently developed proprietory code..... great!

Then, I saw no more mention of it. There were numerous inquiries on the
net as to the availability of 2.0, with no answers (at least none that
I saw). Then, someone posted that 2.0 was available via anonymous ftp.
I naturally assumed that Dave released it.

I personally didn't get a copy of 2.0 gamma until just last week, but
I know it has been widely circulated for quite a while.

>I should point out that this source has "leaked" and is probably
>well worth scarfing up.

This means that it was not HP's or David Taylor's intention to
release 2.0 as such. But now that it is out, ok to use?
Or more to the point, may the readers of this newsgroup use version
2.0 as the "base" version, or should we as users erase it, and work with 1.7?

Thanks for your viewpoint from HP, Jim. I understand that Dave can no longer
support Elm in the manner to which it is accustomed, and I do appreciate
all the work that has been done, and hope and expect to see Dave jump
in there often to offer up his expertise and enhancements.

Enough said...Let's get on with it...
--
Greg