On 19/03/15 21:05, Terence Heaford wrote:
On 19 Mar 2015, at 19:03, Richmond <richmondmathew...@gmail.com> wrote:
An awful lot of us are suffering from distinct impressions: but, then, Runtime
Revolution suffer from the
distinct impression that they are completely open with their user-base . . .
What is the purpose of your post?
To point out that while many of us have distinct impressions that
various things will be sorted out
they are not, and that we may be developing these distinct impressions
because RunRev are not really keeping
us as informed as perhaps they should.
When I invested in the Open Sourcing of Livecode it was on the
understanding that RunRev would be considerably better at keeping their
use-base informed about what they were doing, when they were aiming to
sort out bugs and so forth . . .
I don't feel they have completely lived up to that promise, have let
several things they mentioned in their money-raising thing for Open
Source fall
by the wayside without actually checking how those who donated feel
about that, and have not entirely woken up to the moral duty they have
towards those who donated towards the Open Sourcing effort.
Why I stated that RunRev suffer from a distinct impression is because I
don't think there is any case of malice afore thought, just a
slight misreading of things through no real fault as such of their own.
Richmond.
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
use-livecode@lists.runrev.com
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
