> Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2002 12:15:26 -0400
> From: Ray Denenberg <[log in to unmask]>
> > Then these misbegotten piles of bits are simply not worthy to be
> > called SRW servers, surely?  We are _defining_ the protocol here.
> > Let's not give up on getting it right before we've even started.
> May I infer from your recent postings, the increasing frequency and
> intensity, that you're now jumping on the bandwagon and planning to
> implement?


I would love to implement ZNG if I could possibly find any commercial
case for it in my current job (or indeed find a different job where
that was doable).  But if I'm going to give anything like a reasonable
amount of my time to ZOOM, ZeeRex, Zthes and zSQLgate, then I just
can't afford to launch into yet another "free time" project.

So the answer is: no, I don't have any immediate plans to implement
ZNG.  But I want to make sure that it's sane, so that when my
circumstances change and I _can_ make an implementation, I don't end
up tearing my hair out!

As for the intensity -- I think that's just me being obnoxious :-)

> So maybe you'll reconsider and come to the July meeting?

I would really like to, but there is no way that I can either (A) fund
my employer to send me, or (B) pay to send myself.  Really sorry.
(But touched that you want me there :-)

 _/|_    _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <[log in to unmask]>
)_v__/\  "Politicians, ad agencies, and other liars are prone to using
         high-sounding, low-content, prose to back their points.
         Heck, if people really understood what they were saying,
         they might be in big trouble" -- Rheal Nadeau.