On 8 Jan, John-Mark Bell wrote in message
<1262994399.1688.221.ca...@duiker>:
> If there's some sign of active maintenance before that point is reached,
> great, but I don't have very much hope of it happening, based on past
> evidence.
I would be inclined to agree, I'm afraid. The couple of weeks I freed up in
November were swallowed up with Wakefield Show work which arrived without
warning almost the day after I posted here and came with a tight deadline.
That took me up to the regular monthly writing stuff again, and since that
was done I've had no time due to non-RISC OS things.
I doubt it's news to anyone here (myself included), but there seems little
willingness amongst the remaining RISC OS community to actually *do*
anything about this. Someone (who I assume was firmly grasping the wrong
end of the stick) congratulated me last week on sorting out the NetSurf
problem, which gave me the opportunity to suggest that those present could
help me get started by taking some of the other RISC OS tasks that could be
done in Ovation (so no programming skills required) out of my to-do pile. I
don't think I need to describe the response I've had to that suggestion so
far.
So while I would obviously prefer support for the RISC OS build to continue,
I wouldn't suggest that it is allowed to adversely affect other
developments. If it becomes pragmatic to drop support in April, then that
is the way to go IMHO. It's a shame, but if there are not enough people
left now to do everything that needs to be done for the RISC OS platform,
that isn't going to change at any time soon.
--
Steve Fryatt - Leeds, England
http://www.stevefryatt.org.uk/
