What about the quit menuitem in standalone with 2.5?

[Frank D. Engel, Jr.]

Besides which, bugs in the software ARE related to its usage: they 
often prevent its usage, in fact.

I quite agree with the fact that lack of discussion of some of these 
bugs can prohibit effective use of the software.  If you want the list 
to be focused more specifically on how to use the software within the 
context of how it is supposed to work, that is fine, but the list 
becomes more of an interactive documentation site and less of an actual 
discussion list, in which case a new list would indeed be a reasonable 
solution.

Nearly all of the bugs which we bring up on this list have been making 
their way into bugzilla, at least as far as I have seen.  I tend to 
agree that some of the discussion of bugs might be dragging on *too* 
far and thus become off-topic, but a reasonable-length discussion of 
some of these issues and how others are working around them until they 
are fixed is essential for any kind of software tool like this.  I 
would expect similar discussions for any kind of large-scale software 
(or hardware) product.

Granted bugzilla makes most of the core information available to us as 
Rev users, as well as to you as  the developers of Rev, but a 
discussion of this type could easily (and unnecessarily) waste extra 
time on the part of those in your company who are trying to fix them.

If you wish for these discussions to move off-list, could you at least 
provide or suggest an alternative discussion list, apart from bugzilla, 
where interim solutions (workarounds) to these issues could be 
discussed at greater length?

(It is also possible that collaboration between those of us 
experiencing the problems might sometimes reveal something which could 
help you to isolate and solve them more quickly).

Now that I'm looking at it this way, a "bug discussion list" might 
actually be an ideal situation.  Any takers?

On Sep 3, 2004, at 11:49 AM, Troy Rollins wrote:

>
> With all due respect, this is an EXTREMELY frustrating position you 
> are taking. Discussion of bugs is not only common on developer lists, 
> it is expected. While no one expects the development team to pick up 
> on bugs from discussions here, often times it is the end-user 
> introducing some issue, or the list members know a workaround, or 
> simply prefer to know about such issues before they encounter them. 
> The RunRev stance of trying to keep such discussions out of this list 
> will also keep professional developers out of this list, since we are 
> quite accustomed to open discussion of any usage issues regarding the 
> tools we work with. Limiting such discussion, and demanding that 
> Bugzilla be the only point of entry on these things makes it look like 
> you are trying to hide something, and it is also a very low feedback 
> mechanism. It is akin to saying, "if you encounter what you think is a 
> bug, put your development project on the shelf until we determine if 
> you are right or wrong. That could take an indefinite amount of time, 
> during which you are out of luck."
>
> If the intention of this list is to act like a marketing vehicle where 
> everyone is happy, and there are no apparent bugs in the software, 
> then I think we need another, more reality-based list, aimed at 
> registered users of studio or above which is more open to discussion 
> of bugs, workarounds and solutions to the inevitable issues that arise 
> in professional software development.
> --
>
-----------------------------------------------------------
Frank D. Engel, Jr.  <fde101 at fjrhome.net>



___________________________________________________________
$0 Web Hosting with up to 120MB web space, 1000 MB Transfer
10 Personalized POP and Web E-mail Accounts, and much more.
Signup at www.doteasy.com