Open Letter to Rev: Quality Is Job #1

[Lynn Fredricks]

> > The core engineering team uses Bugzilla. If they have to spend time
> sifting
> > through other venues that's time they cant spend on fixing and 
> > featuring Rev. Engineering also reads the Improve list, but again, 
> > there's a limit
> to
> > the amount of time they can spend on that.
> 
> Lynn, it is my understanding, as stated by J. Landman Gay in 
> an earlier post, that CRASH reports get top priority to be 
> fixed. What you are saying is that the one free and automatic 
> crash reporting mechanism that is available to Runtime is 
> ignored over the preferred and cumbersome Bugzilla. Users of 

Crashes get top priority, certainly.

I have a limited understanding of the technical aspects of integrating the
MS method into software - I don't think its all that hard based on the
feedback Ive gotten from other companies - but that feedback is based on
"regular" applications and not a development tool that has such a complex
set of underpinnings as Revolution. I think it's a really neat mechanism!

On the other hand, it's the back end that matters and that is not free and
automatic - and that's why I think this topic is too complex to generalize
about. Bugzilla is in place and, customers who encounter a problem do have
to stop and think a minute before they use it. That eats some time - it also
asks users to get involved in the process on the vendor's terms. The upside
to that is that those reports that come usually have had some intelligence
applied to them - and possibly the user has already determined that the
crash was caused by some other software or something they did.

Im not saying the MS solution won't be integrated at some point, it just
hasn't made sense in the past to do so.

Best regards,


Lynn Fredricks
Worldwide Business Operations
Runtime Revolution, Ltd