Development of digital preservation utilities cost money (and time). Even some of the more significant tools in use today are developed by a lone dev. There is no model for funding these projects that means that they can be used by large institutions in a way that supports the lone-developer. There isn't necessarily a correlation between what a dev can do in their day job vs. the tooling they are developing in support of that. The cost on the dev who remains unfunded is uncountable. Some may simply have to leave the project or leave the field. Some are younger that were able to sustain something for a small period, but with greater responsibilities can no longer "do it for free". A tool will inevitably be supported by someone if it continues to be useful it just won't necessarily be supported by the first individual.
Development of digital preservation utilities cost money (and time). Even some of the more significant tools in use today are developed by a lone dev. There is no model for funding these projects that means that they can be used by large institutions in a way that supports the lone-developer. There isn't necessarily a correlation between what a dev can do in their day job vs. the tooling they are developing in support of that. The cost on the dev who remains unfunded is uncountable. Some may simply have to leave the project or leave the field. Some are younger that were able to sustain something for a small period, but with greater responsibilities can no longer "do it for free". A tool will inevitably be supported by someone if it continues to be useful it just won't necessarily be supported by the first individual.