🚀 go-pugleaf

At 8:50 PM +0000 98/4/20, Luca Pisati wrote:
>I remember the Mac Docex application, that would allow you to have Docex
>access
>from a Mac, but I don't remember if it needed to run on a MacIvory, though.
>If not, maybe that should be the perfect "app".

Well remembered.  I have never seen the sources to this.

>> I don't see the Docex itself being the issue, rather the Genera
>> documentation.  Which might help keep SLUG alive by allowing access to new
>> users, even evangelise it to some extent.
>
>The only question is: what about (C) ??
>
>If this issue would be cleaned, then I would jump on doing it.

Exactly.  I am with you.

From previous discussions on the subject it appeared that community
interest in Genera seemed to infer commercial value in it, hence the
ownership issues retreated ever further.  A catch 22 sort of situation.
The more interest that the community has in keeping Genera alive the more
inclined "owners" are to act in a manner which is likely to keep throttling
it (like keeping it invisible).

Perhaps there are new ownership battles afoot, in which case can we hope to
influence the outcome such that new management appreciate that it is in
Genera's interest (and any commercial ones too) that it is kept alive, and
to that end visible.

Lispms evolved from ivory towers into expensive boxes for the elite.
I wonder what future seperating Genera development environment products
from Genera sources and documentation.  Such that the latter can become
accessible, hence benefiting the former (if there is still felt to be life
in it).  This sounds like heracy in a commercial sense, but maybe it is
time to think of something completely different - conventional business
strategies do not seem to have the remotest chance of working.  This is a
fashion industry.

Back to the issues - IPR and ownership of what was Symbolics.  Can anyone
enlighten the SLUG world?