3 messages in com.perforce.jammingRE(2): Who is using Jam?
Subject:RE(2): Who is using Jam?
From:C.Co...@slh0633.wins.icl.co.uk C.Coles@slh0633.wins.icl.co.uk (C.Co@slh0633.wins.icl.co.uk C.Coles@slh0633.wins.icl.co.uk)
Date:02/07/1997 12:53:28 AM
List:com.perforce.jamming

Thanks everybody who has responded. That will certainly help to give the warm feeling required :-)

Stephen (of pc-plus), sorry I enticed you into shhooting yourself in the foot. :-) My main reason for suggesting that people might want their names/companies withheld from any document that I might produce was to avoid one of my customers going to one of you and pestering you or otherwise using the information to score points off you. As, to a certain extent, all of us on the mailing list have a vested interest in jam, I don't think you need worry. In fact, I think the points that you made were worth airing to the wider audience.

From my own part, I am still keen to push forward. I do have some reservations about Jam which I will raise in another posting but when it comes down to it, I have managed to boil down 75,000 lines of Makefiles down to about 2000 lines of Jam and, to me, that carries a lot of weight. This is, of course, not a typical example - there was an awful lot of redundancy in the Makefiles.

Thanks again for your responses, everybody. Regards, Wilf