> That comes across as a real slap in the face for every one that has supported NetSurf, both by reporting bugs and financially, since it's inception on RISC OS.
I doubt it was intended. Bug reports are always useful. The developer's can't visit every page on the web and bug reports have been good especially for highlighting layout issues.
With the recent change to LibCSS, I don't think we'd really said anywhere (that would be seen by users) that the CSS parser and selection engine had changed, and what issues to expect. So we got a bunch of reports about stuff we expected and also a couple of reports of stuff we didn't know about on the bug tracker, iirc.
Anyway, yes, losing the RISC OS users as testers is one of the sad sides of having to drop RISC OS support.
> Other platforms came in relatively recently, and now you can't wait to bin RISC OS off.
This is just complete rubbish. Noone wants to "bin RISC OS off". The reason we can't maintain the RISC OS front end has been stated several times. I'll state it again.
+ There are nolonger any NetSurf developers who have WIMP knowledge and RISC OS hardware or time to invest in it.
This has been the case for the last two and a half years. We've mentioned before that there was noone developing the RISC OS front end, but to my knowledge noone approached us to help.
It is precisely because we don't want to drop RISC OS support that we made this urgent appeal, asking for developers to help. We've also spent time recently simplifying the RISC OS build instructions and making it far easier for a RISC OS developer to get NetSurf built. For example now, to build and install all our libraries (like Hubbub, LibCSS, etc) you just need to type *make install.
As for the other platforms and how recently they came in, it really has nothing to do with the problem the RISC OS front end faces. The AmigaOS front end has an Amiga developer to work on it, the BeOS front end has a BeOS developer. The GTK front end has mostly been developed by GSoC students lately. The difference is that there are people to develop those front ends, while for the RISC OS front end there is noone.
This is sad, but other than asking for a developer to help maintain the RISC OS front end, what else can we do?