Kees van Eeten wrote to Roy Witt about MakeNL v3.4.1 Release:
          No pseudo-French spellings, please!

 RW>> I'm aware of my RCs problems with it, even the new version.

 KvE>  That is not a problem, it is an expectation, that is not in line
 KvE> with a design parameter, that was discussed in this echo.

That may be the problem. I dunno if my RC is keeping up with the thread.
What I do know is that I have to block certain keywords in my CTL file
until he gets a working environment with MNL instead of NLM.

 RW>> No, I'm quite aware of that and also that it has been fixed. But,
 RW>> you'll have to convince my RC of that, since he's not using it for a
 RW>> reason.

 KvE>  I will do my part of the convincing in Zone 2, it is more effective
 KvE> if your RC is convinced from within Zone 1.

As Janis has pointed out (I wasn't aware), they're working that out in the
RC-exclusive echo. Had I been made aware I could have continued to ask him
to keep trying it.

 RW>> Not all RCs, just a few or maybe even a majority. My RC is reluctant
 RW>> to repeat what happened when he tried it, last year. He'll continue
 RW>> to use NLmake until then, AFAIK...

 KvE>  Your RC is upholding a process, that was started 10 yesrs ago and
 KvE> has almost come to fruition.

Unfortunately, it is two RCs who run an OS that isn't compatable with the
software. If it were me, I'd change to an OS that's known to work and
follow up with making sure that the OS/2 version worked before going back
to it. With all of the junk computers around, that shouldn't be too hard
to do.

 RW>> and why are the results of that new release kept from the other RCs?

 KvE>  Ask the two RC's, how would I know.

You said that the RCs that have it working on OS/2 systems have kept it a
secret, how do you know that? Just asking, mind you.


        R\%/itt


--- GoldED+/W32 1.1.5-31012
--- D'Bridge 3.92
 * Origin: South Texas Hub - Gulf Coast Backbone (1:387/22)