Re: lynx-dev Can you help me please (fwd)

[Foteos Macrides]

Nelson Henry Eric <address@hidden> wrote:
>> It was explained in the PROBLEMS file through v2.7.2, with emphasis
>> in the INTALLATION file that VMSers read it, and there are extensive
> 
>Yet when asked twice, politely, for volunteers to revamp the VMS compile
>section of INSTALLATION, there was nothing forthcoming.  0.

        That one's easy to answer.  When you asked, the devel code wouldn't
build on VMS, so how can you write a section for something that can't be
done?  I did get it buildable on VMS again, which seemed more important.
My involvement with VMS has ended with my retirement from the WFBR, and
was close at hand at the time.  I released v2.7.2 when it became clear
that Klaus had departed in November, and the Christmas target had come
and gone with no word from him.  The last time that happened, he was gone
for about 5 months (and it's been 6 months thus far this time).  The devel
code still was far from ready for a release, and things like the security
problems in the CERT advisory were still outstanding.  So I went ahead and
released my personal code set.  I also arranged for the SSL stuff to be
available from cryptography, so someone else could carry the ball on that,
as has happened.  I then checked out the devel code for ability to build on
VMS, and posted a message that VMSers should continue to check it out and
help keep it ported.  I also posted that I was moving to NY.  By the time
I had settled in and established Internet connectivity, v2.8 had been
released.  My interest in keeping Lynx ported to VMS has nothing to do
with myself using it on VMS.  You think TD is earnestly concerned about
that too, but for a variety of reasons, including that he repeatedly broke
it when he could have avoided that if he were earnestly concerned, I
think you're again giving way to wishful thinking.


>                                                         Rather than
>wasting time on caustic language aimed, for no reason or benefit, against
>the only hope we have for an active co-ordinator of Lynx development
     ?????????
>activity, why don't you rewrite INSTALLATION yourself, as Doug, Bill,
>Leonid and others have done for the DOS386 port, so that VMSers can have
>less pain.

        I think you're underestimating people who could step in, and in
the long run do a better job of keeping Lynx really viable as an Internet
browser.  But it isn't going to happen while you promote paranoia about
the "only hope who can fill the void".  He's been at it two years now,
and as far as I can tell he has yet to read an HTML, HTTP, URL, CSS2,
MHTML, or DOM spec.  What kind of Internet browser does that portend for
Lynx?  I certainly hope he continues to participate in the development.

        But OK Henry, for you, I'll butt out (not for TD or a foreground
noise yoyo like Phillip Webb :).

                                        Fote
-- 
Foteos Macrides