A Breezy status update

[Martin (gzlist)]

On 15/06/2017, Eli Zaretskii <eliz at gnu.org> wrote:
>
> So you actually removed support for Windows 9X, not for W2K and XP, is
> that right?

Yes, but we've also updated dependencies and made a whole bunch of
other changes.

> I'm not sure I understand what that means in practice.

What it means in practice is unless someone steps up to make releases
and do testing, users will have to build and install for themselves,
and report bugs when things break. As Mark points out, this is free
software, anyone can do that.

> Will there not be 32-bit builds as well?  If so, you lose XP just
> because of that.

There was a 64-bit XP once - but yes, this and the other reasons
mentioned is why I'm saying promising more is unrealistic.

Martin