>I remain hopeful that KG may write an article for one of the VFP mags. Under the circumstances, it's difficult to imagine which it might be. ;-) IMHO his primary interest in SQL Server/SPs is extremely pertinent to much of the real VFP community and is enough by itself to cause some of us to shell out $.

Ummmh, the connection between him and the trouble on some author asking for money for arleady paid articles makes a connecting of minds dubious - although I am certain if KG offers a well written article it would be accepted. I see more trouble in very early phases of sniffing<g>

>
>At the risk of seeming provocative ;-) I'd quite like to see an article on running VFP on Linux. I realize that the licensing implications created waves a few years back, but VFP's shrinkage changes everything: presumably there are lots of unused VFP development licenses out there, each of which allows installation of VFP/apps on one non-Windows server/computer. Perhaps VFP developers might like to buy a few? Or if you can get a VFP6 license, I'm told the licensing restrictions don't exist at all. Perhaps the people who were so disappointed to have their efforts thwarted some years ago can be motivated to renew their interest.

Linux was running as a theme in german devcon a few years back, but *resonance* was not that great. Linux is not totally unknown in one of the companies Rainer works in (a few VM's and one old clunker running native), but the topic vfp on linux is not seen pressing. Getting a IDE license for each install is preposterous (as much as I like vfp, unless it is for a single customer the price hike could be put to better use after if the no. of users is more than single digit).

If a client really asks a vfp app on linux - IANAL and proud of it - dunno. Methinks if I create a solution in vfp and a customer installs it (including the runtimes) under linux, it is his decision to make. I am positive there is not a dire wish to test before a european court of law, if the MS-clauses of the EULA in regard to installing the runtime under linux/WINE are
a) really to be interpreted as was in the mails from MS back then
b) if a) was the case, it would be binding
c) it might raise other discussions about monopoly/unfair use

but what I currently see over here is more a need to connect to Linux based backends, not running on linux clients. That may change (esp. in govt), but I believe at least half of the proponents of the move back then are currently quite happy developing their framework in python. But I guess it only needs one linux-interested large client who is not afraid for interest to resume.

>I'm also interested in the NET Compiler/Guineu. There are people like Pertti Karjalainen who seem to have taken a particular interest in some of these areas and might be very willing/excited to write an article.

Well, the connection between Rainer and Christoph is closer as they know each other from long vfp years, but Rainer is well aware of Etec (and not only from my ramblings<g>). On a finished product - surely something will be published, and in depth. But a running report of something not yet finished is perhaps better left in threads - even if *any* news is interesting.

>I suspect that these sorts of ideas are what KG was referring to in his comments. Actually I thought he was trying to be helpful. Oh well.

I was ambivalent until the other matter evolved. Now I think less of the party KG thinks highly of.

>I'm assuming you're not going to come back at me instructing me to address myself to the Editorial Board rather than to you. ;-)

If you really need any help in bringing a finished article to the editor's attention, I might help you<g>.

regards

thomas