[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
A few more comments on Kunze:
I got a call from Fritz Kunze of Franz Lisp. The essence of his call was
to raise the issue of membership on the Steering and Technical committees.
He made the claim that he expected to have some one from his company on
these committees as a result of discussions he had at the Boston meeting
(not with me).
He might have expected anything, but I'm sure that none of us would have
tried to hint to him that someone from Franz, Inc would be on the
committee. At the time of the meeting, we all knew that we did NOT yet
what the composition of the committee wold be, and we all knew that not
every company would have one of its employees chosen. There is no
justification for this statement on Kunze's part.
He made the further claim that the part of the community
represented by these interests was being kept out of the proceedings
and that this was having a serious adverse commercial impact on his
company and that this places the credability of the organization at risk.
Any company with a Lisp implementation could make precisely the same
claim with the same validity. Fateman would probably argue that their
claim is "more valid" since it appears to be Fateman's contention (and
has been for years) that Franz Lisp has more users than any other Lisp
implementation and is therefore special. (I wonder if he's counted all
of the various IBM-PC Lisps, and I wonder if he has some particular way
of knowing how many individuals at a given Unix site actually use Franz
Lisp at all, or with any frequency and skill.) Given that we cannot
have an employee of every Lisp-implementing company on the committee,
this claim has no weight.
It appears that he feels very strongly about this and is able to make
claims that at least on the surface raise serious questions. He has a
model of various members interests that he uses to support his case.
It might be interesting to know what this model is.