1SLUG library status report.0

["J. Scott Penberthy" <JSP@ibm.com>]

Wilson,

I don't think that Andrew Chalmick's ROOMS program will work with
S-Paint -- S-Paint uses Function-Square to unwedge itself
(Function-square calls 2paint:kbd-nuclear-unwedge0).  Perhaps he might
change his software so that the "room" function key is user-definable?

Also, the legal repurcussions of submitting a software tape to SLUG may
prevent many useful programs from ever being released.  Through
conversations with many users at the last SLUG conference, it seems that
many of us work for large conglomerates whose laws and regulations
impede, if not prevent, the release of software written on the company's
time. Only those members that work for smaller and/or more
liberal-minded companies will be able to submit their hacks. This is
evidenced by the company origins of the current SLUG library
submissions:  Symbolics, MIT, UPenn, BBN, TMI, and the US Army.
Universities are usually quite lax about software; its hard to determine
whether it was written on their time or on the individual's time (ditto
for the US Army?).  On the other hand, I didn't see any submissions from
IBM, Boeing, HP, Tektronix, Bell Labs, or other multi-national firms.

The SLUG library is a great idea, but the current legal hassles will
undoubtedly reduce the number of possible submissions.  Perhaps a new
legal contract can be drawn, one that includes an "optional source"
clause much like Symbolics uses for its PLA.  I'm not a lawyer, so I
couldn't say what should and should not be in this new contract.  All I
know is that I've been told to neither submit nor receive software from
SLUG.  Unfortunately, I imagine that many others have been restricted
in similar ways.

--Scott