Re: Voyager goals

Peter Flass wrote:
> I'm disappointed that at least some degree of binary capability is not one of
> your current goals.  I have several 3rd-party OS/2 packages that I don't have
> source for, and can think of many others.  Examples:
>   IBM PL/I for OS/2 compiler
>   PCOM Personal Communications
>   Book Manager for OS/2
>   DB/2 universal database
> 
> This is your project, you can set whatever goals you want, but my feeling is
> that without binary compatibility you will be severely limiting possible uses
> and users of the new O/S.

Hi Peter,

I somewhat agree with you in a way that I wold see some binary 
compatibility for at least some APIs - my favourite is the textmode API, 
for example. I would see for example Info-Zip stuff working from the 
beginning.

But what you ask for, is by far too much. Retaining that many APIs, 
being required by the named programs, is IMHO completely unrealistic, 
for several reasons.

May it be that you do not even roughly know what set of APIs (not only 
operating system APIs !) are alone required for an application like PCOM ?

Furthermore, and even more important, where do you aim at with the 
meanwhile completely outdated and not longer maintained OS/2 versions of 
e.g. PCOM and DB2 ? I'd say they are not longer of much use. When a new