Re: More questions [from herc/390]

--- In [email protected], "tsagoth"
 <[email protected]> wrote:
 - - - snipped - - -
> Perhaps a bad example. What I meant is that products
>(like RACF) have defined interfaces. So other programs
>that invoke their services will pass a parameter list
>in a certain format because that's what the called
>program expects. So if you were cloning a product to
>provide the same functionality, you would necessarily
>have to accept the same parameter list format.  My
>question was, is that in fact allowed ?

    I would totally redesign RACF, but if you want to
 use MVS 3.8j SYS1.MACLIB(IHAACEE), be my guest.

    At one time I ran ACF2.  It could handle both
 RACF formated requests and its own.  They might have
 paid IBM, but I doubt it.

>ISPF maybe is a better example. Suppose I clone it,
>call it TSAGEDIT. 
>Now any existing program invokes ISPF services via
>calling ISPLINK and passing 2 CL8 fields with service
>names. In order to be compatible, my clone would have
>to accept a parameter list that starts with 2 CL8
>fields that contain service names. If the copyright 
>of the macro that defines IBM's version means that
>I'm forbidden to use a parameter list that starts
>with 2 CL8 fields, then it means there's no way to
>clone ISPF and have it be compatible with already 
>compiled programs out there.

    There are hundreds of programs on multiple
 operating systems that call ISPLINK.  I cannot see
 how IBM can say that you cannot support them.  If you
 do support them, you should both write your own
 ISPLINK and allow products to run that have ISPLINK
 linked in.
 
> Based on your answer about IHAPSA, I guess your
>non-legal opinion is, it's probably ok.
>> Did I mention that I'm not a mouth-piece?
> Hmm, I think so. I'm not looking to build an empire,
>merely seeking some opinions. If say, many people said
>"No chance, you can't do that" then I would suspect
>that a particular idea was bad. If, on the other hand,
>general opinion was "Should be ok", then *maybe* that 
>idea won't get squashed by IBM. I'm well aware that
>"The people on the list said it would be ok" isn't a
>defence. I'm just trying to get an idea of what's
>forbidden vs what's *probably* ok.

    I don't know what is forbidden or what is not.
 I assume that we are allowed to write code.
 I assume that we are allowed to use IBM provided
 interfaces.
 I assume that we can simulate IBM interfaces for
 other people's code.
 I assume that in most cases, you cannot copy IBM's
 copyrighted source or macros.
 I assume that in most cases, you cannot copy IBM's
 copyrighted load modules.
 I assume that some IBM ideas might be off limits?


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/dpFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
hercules-advocacy-unsubscribe-hHKSG33TihhbjbujkaE4pw@public.gmane.org

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/