Not the author of those scripts, in particular, but as the author of other scripts, I can speak to my position on updating my code to work with Jumpgate, the 2024 sheet, or Beacon sheets in general: All of these things are still a work in progress, and Roll20 has already shown a general disinterest in what script authors are doing, currently, or what we might have to say regarding concerns for the changes they are building. There has been a lack of care for what scripts they break with changes they've already rolled out. Those two points, together, make me think I won't get any future warning if their current direction on these initiatives changes, again, nor will there be much consideration of the impact their changes make on existing scripts. That makes me hesitant to undertake updates, aiming for a landing spot that might still shift. I've always seen the scripts produced by people writing for the community (as opposed to people just writing to solve their own niche need in their own game) as a value-add for Pro membership. In fact, the ability to use pre-built, powerful scripts like those you mention is the primary reason for an ongoing subscription, in my opinion. Unfortunately, Roll20 has shown they have a different valuation. But... that is what it is. My only point in answering is that I think that view will slow code refactoring, new development, and possibly overall adoption.