On 10 Nov at 22:04, Steve (ROOL) <[email protected]> wrote: > On 10 Nov, Richard Walker <[email protected]> wrote: > > I wasn't necessarily thinking of the ROOL bounty scheme - it was > > more of a general comment. The ROOL scheme is obviously aimed at > > RISC OS 5, rather than RPCEmu. > > That's true. We're certainly extremely pleased to see the progress > that's happened with RPCEmu over the years and it aligns very nicely > with our objectives of having a completely free RISC OS emulation > solution that people from outside the community can try out to see > what it's all about. > > Having said all that, the bounty scheme on the ROOL site is > specifically about RISC OS 5 and not the right place (just yet) for > third party components.
<snip> So we have a proposal for a 'bounty', one plonker (me) who has come out from under the closet to say he will support it, but no clear definition of what the project should be or how any bounty scheme should be organised. I am still prepared to stump up, but only to a sensibly organised proposal; I am not prepared to do any more as I have other matters that take up my time. I now await developments :-). -- Tim Powys-Lybbe [email protected] for a miscellany of bygones: http://powys.org/ _______________________________________________ Rpcemu mailing list [email protected] http://www.riscos.info/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/rpcemu
