Wake up Revolution

[Richmond Mathewson]

Richard Gaskin wrote:
> Mark Schonewille wrote:
>
>> Who says that tousand people experience great performance?! I, for  
>> one, don't.
>
> I haven't seen your RQCC report on this.  What's the #?
>
> After reading the messages here, in the forum, and other venues, yours 
> and Inselfan's posts are the first I've come across during the long 
> preview cycle which report that there's something wrong with v4's 
> performance.
>
> Now that we have a second data point reflecting similar results we can 
> modify the analysis of the problem, but the basic principle remains 
> the same:  identify the differences between the working and 
> non-working states.
>
>> I am pretty sure that Inselfan did something that should just work 
>> in  Revolution without problems and figuring out the source of the 
>> problem  is a process that one should not have to go through with a 
>> development  environment like Revolution in the first place!
>
> I wholeheartedly agree, 

There is a school of thought that RunRev have tried to expand the 
capabilities of Revolution rather too
rapidly, without taking care of some 'nuts-and-bolts' glitches that have 
been around for some time.

There is a risk, as one runs for the finish line, with one's eye on the 
prize, that one doesn't see the
banana skin on the track.

> and share the desire for an ideal world in which everything always 
> works perfectly.
>
> But in our imperfect world all processes have a failure rate, and the 
> software development process is no exception.
>
> If the good folks at RunRev are aware of this issue I doubt they 
> consider it acceptable, and are likely working on it I write this.
>
> But if they're not yet aware of it they may require some assistance to 
> be able to replicate it.  That's where we come in:  when we see a 
> problem, we try arrive at a recipe for reproducing it and report it to 
> the RQCC.
>
>