Re: Ultrix/OSF1 ports.

[Paul_Gleichauf@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU]

Scott,
	I of course left out the most important information that
prompted me to start this in earnest.  The Feburary 3 issue of
Digital Review gives a schedule for OSF/1 releases. They run as
follows:
	Version		nickname	release-date	end-users
	1.0		"tin"	 	now		developers
	2.0		"silver"	year-end	production
	3.0		"gold"		early '93	security

	The current campus version is either 4.0 or 4.1 and is not
OSF/1 compliant.  The beta release version on one campus machine is
probably called 5.0.
	The real world is not likely to take on the OSF/1 system
until 2.0 is made widely available, and that may not be well into
next year.  We don't know how much upgrades cost, but it seems
unlikely that customers will make the shift until something more
robust than tin is available, and their budgets can absorb the
shift. 
	So the reality is that most users will not see OSF/1 until
1993, after we will have submitted the renewal proposal.  Rob has
also offered the conjecture that William should need no more than a
week to complete a port, and not the month that I had previously
supposed or the in-between time you estimate.  I am concerned that
this is the quickest avenue to at least doubling our user base, with
the least hassle, except for updating new cores, and that if we wait
for the DEC situation to settle, it will be too late for renewal.
	I will reply to Jake's request regarding UIL.

					Paul