arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson) (01/10/90)
I just read an article in Government Computer News that really bothered me. It was a front page article in the Jan 8 issue, entitled "Budget Ax Hangs Over Ada Funds". Now, contrary to what you may be thinking, what bothers me is not so much that Congress is cutting AJPO funding (alright, that bothers me, but that is not what REALLY bothers me), but what the article says AJPO is doing with the money they got (or will be getting). Specifically, out of $11.2 million, $7.87 million is allotted to the ALS/N effort. (Note: AJPO director John Solomond does say he has authority to reallocate some of this funding.) What bothers me is that such a large part of the AJPO funding is going to develop a compiler for the Navy. I believe the AJPO should be concentrating the bulk of its efforts (and $$$) on more generally useful jobs, such as several of those Solomond listed as new plans (metrics standards, style guide, compiler evaluation, and maintaining a project database), and of course Ada 9X. It's not that I don't think sponsoring (and learning from) a compiler development effort is such a bad idea, just that the priority and funding given to it is too high. It also seems to me that the language has been around long enough that the AJPO shouldn't have to put that much emphasis on specific projects such as ALS/N or pilot projects funded under ATIP (the Ada Technology Insertion Program, which will possibly be eliminated entirely by the budget cuts). It's about time folks got off their duff and started funding these things themselves, simply because it is the right way to go and will benefit them in the long run. Let the AJPO be a source (repository) of information; manage the Ada standard; and help people/agencies/companies transition to Ada by providing information and guidance, not by funding individual efforts. What do you think? -- Arny Engelson att!wayback!arny (201)386-4816
billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu (William Thomas Wolfe, 2847 ) (01/11/90)
From arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson): > I just read an article in Government Computer News that really bothered me. > [...] out of $11.2 million, $7.87 million is allotted to the ALS/N effort. > [...] I believe the AJPO should be concentrating the bulk of its efforts > (and $$$) on more generally useful jobs, such as several of those Solomond > listed as new plans (metrics standards, style guide, compiler evaluation, > and maintaining a project database), and of course Ada 9X. [...] Let the > AJPO be a source (repository) of information; manage the Ada standard; > and help people/agencies/companies transition to Ada by providing > information and guidance, not by funding individual efforts. > > What do you think? I think AJPO should concentrate ALL of its efforts on projects of *general* interest to the Ada community... why does the Navy deserve any such massive subsidy, or in fact any subsidy at all??? One of the major areas in which some additional $$$ would go a long way for the entire Ada community would be having the Ada Software Repository receive the funding necessary to get its components tested and certified. If the Navy would stop retiling the decks of shipboard spaces and the floors of naval base facilities every time an officer decides s/he doesn't like the color, stop paying Marines to sit around polishing brass all day, etc., there would be enough money to buy ALS/N and a new carrier battle group besides. Arny is exactly right -- let the Navy pay for ALS/N themselves!!! Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu
schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) (01/11/90)
In article <7627@hubcap.clemson.edu> billwolf%hazel.cs.clemson.edu@hubcap.clemson.edu writes: >From arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson): >> I just read an article in Government Computer News that really bothered me. >> [...] out of $11.2 million, $7.87 million is allotted to the ALS/N effort. >> [...] I believe the AJPO should be concentrating the bulk of its efforts >> (and $$$) on more generally useful jobs, such as several of those Solomond >> listed as new plans (metrics standards, style guide, compiler evaluation, >> and maintaining a project database), and of course Ada 9X. [...] >> >> What do you think? > > I think AJPO should concentrate ALL of its efforts on projects of > *general* interest to the Ada community... why does the Navy deserve > any such massive subsidy, or in fact any subsidy at all??? > > [...] > Bill Wolfe, wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu Bill and Arny (and others) - I'll try to check this out, but I seem to recall, that in effect, the Navy is paying for ALS/N. I believe that this money originally came out of the Navy's budget. I vaguely remember that Congress took the ALS/N project away from the Navy, including all funding an gave to AJPO a couple of years ago. The Navy may still be paying the tab on ALS/N, just sending it to AJPO. The fact that AJPO's projected budget is $11.2 million doesn't indicate where that money is coming from initially. You can't always tell from the program element number or budget line item number either. The funding may very well been transferred from another line prior to submission to Congress by the President. This was not unheard of when I was doing budget planning for Navy C2 systems in the Pentagon (I left there about a year ago). Does anyone out there have the full details/history of ALS/N funding? Jeff Schweiger -- ******************************************************************************* Jeff Schweiger CompuServe: 74236,1645 Standard Disclaimer ARPAnet (Defense Data Network): schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil *******************************************************************************
keith@sunpix.UUCP ( Sun Visualization Products) (01/12/90)
In article <545@cs.nps.navy.mil> schweige@cs.nps.navy.mil (Jeffrey M. Schweiger) writes:
##From arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson):
### I just read an article in Government Computer News that really bothered me.
### [...] out of $11.2 million, $7.87 million is allotted to the ALS/N effort.
### [...] I believe the AJPO should be concentrating the bulk of its efforts
### (and $$$) on more generally useful jobs, [...]
#
#I'll try to check this out, but I seem to recall, that in effect, the Navy
#is paying for ALS/N. I believe that this money originally came out of the
#Navy's budget. I vaguely remember that Congress took the ALS/N project away
#from the Navy, including all funding an gave to AJPO a couple of years ago.
#The Navy may still be paying the tab on ALS/N, just sending it to AJPO. The
#fact that AJPO's projected budget is $11.2 million doesn't indicate where
#that money is coming from initially. [...]
As a former ALS/Ner (technical, not management, so take this
money talk with a grain of salt) who left partly due to the perception of
shaky funding, I believe Jeff is essentially correct. Approximately
two years ago, ALS/N funding was moved from the Navy to the AJPO
partly as a way to provide higher visibility of the funds. I believe
the rationale for this was that this provided fewer ways for admirals
to get their hands on the money for their own pet projects.
I am almost positive that the money is still coming out of Navy
pocketbooks, though, because I remember anxiously tracking money
through the various stages: Congress ... Navy ... AJPO ...
Program Office ... Control Data ... AH, a paycheck!!!ecragg@GMUVAX.GMU.EDU ("EDWARD CRAGG") (01/13/90)
From wtwolfe@hubcap.clemson.edu (Bill Wolfe) > From arny@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (arny.b.engelson): > > I just read an article in Government Computer News that really bothered me. > > [...] out of $11.2 million, $7.87 million is allotted to the ALS/N effort. > > [...] I believe the AJPO should be concentrating the bulk of its efforts > > (and $$$) on more generally useful jobs, . . . > > I think AJPO should concentrate ALL of its efforts on projects of > *general* interest to the Ada community... why does the Navy deserve > any such massive subsidy, or in fact any subsidy at all??? > It is my understanding that the $7.87 million in the AJPO budget for the ALS/N came from the Navy in the sense that the Navy budget was reduced by that amount. I understand that the congressional purpose was to assure that ALS/N monies would be used for ALS/N and not reprogrammed by the Navy elsewhere. (If you examin the history of the program you will find a continuing pattern of the Navy using ALS/N to justify both funding and suplemental funding from Congress, and upon receiving the funding, reprogramming it elsewhere.) AJPO is not subsidizing the ALS/N effort -- they are the funding source, and were there no ALS/N, the AJPO budget would be reduced accordingly. ............................................................ Edward E Cragg Bitnet: ECRAGG@GMUVAX Internet: ECRAGG@GMUVAX.GMU.EDU