from Glenn McCorkle: > I disagree.
> IMHO, > Arachne is still "Michael's baby". > It's not GPL until *HE* says it's GPL. > I *will* wait (no matter how long it takes), > for Michael to say "OK, release it". Through this list, I had the impression that Arachne already had GPL status. Could my impression have been wrong? I didn't think Michael was teasing us. Has Michael been doing anything at all on Arachne in the last couple years? He hasn't even done anything regarding the list unsubscribe nonfunction, nor about fixing that [EMAIL PROTECTED] loophole that allows spammers to spam the entire Arachne list plus some other people. If I put a lot of my time toward developing an updated version of Arachne, I would be quite unwilling for my work to go to waste by not being allowed to release it. I can't see waiting any more than ten days for Michael to say "OK, release it", even ten days seems generous, considering that Michael has apparently disappeared from the scene. Glenn, you know you only live once, you won't live forever, and the rapid advance of computer technology won't wait for people like us. I will be more interested in Mozilla and will then not look back to Arachne. There has been a bug in bluegrass.net server with the email, since their new antispam filter was instituted. Apparently I didn't get any mail from some time June 3 to some time June 13, except what was quarantined as spam and which included some legit mail. This new antispam filter sucks and is completely pointless, since (I believe, haven't tried) Bluegrass Net has a web mail interface in addition to the usual POP3, by which Bluegrass Net users can perhaps prescreen their mail. Anybody know what commands to send to [EMAIL PROTECTED], which archives I need to retrieve for June 3 to 13, 2003? from Sam Ewalt: > I think there are only two DOS browsers that anyone is currently > trying to do anything with in terms of keeping them current. > There's Arachne and that version of DosLynx that I forget the > name of. There might be two versions of that, now that I think > about it. Bobcat and maybe something else? > Every other DOS browser seems quite dead by now. Information to > the contrary would be appreciated. Let's hope further development of Arachne is not blocked by a perceived need to secure permission from somebody who has apparently disappeared from the scene. I think the active version of DosLynx is the 32-bit port at http://www.rahul.net/dkaufman/ Older-style DosLynx with pulldown menus has no doubt gone lame duck. I follow Net-Tamer (http://www.nettamer.net/tamer.html) sporadically, like once a year if I'm lucky: seems to have gone lame duck, and I see no signs of life for any other DOS browser.
