Me, me, me [bug ref 3420]

[Dave]

On 16 Nov 2006, at 12:28, Bernard Devlin wrote:

> Dave
>
> I decided to look in bugzilla myself, and I found that it was  
> indeed entered as a bug by the ever-gracious Mr. Gaskin on  
> 23.3.06.   Marcus from Runrev accepted that it "is pathological"  
> and should  probably be considerd a bug (and it is indeed still  
> open as a bug).  When I searched back through the archive for March  
> this year, I found there was already a lengthy discussion of this  
> between you, Mark Smith, and Richard.  All three of you agreed it  
> seemed to be a bug, and Richard even told you he put it in bugzilla  
> for you (in fact, he entered 2 bug reports for it).

Yes, I said I'd revisited it since people seem keen to fix bugs. Read  
my first post.

>
> In bugzilla it is given a severity of minor, which since it only  
> appears to affect your idiomatic usage of Rev, and since Richard  
> provided you with a workaround (even though it is one that you do  
> not like), "minor" is probably a reasonable severity.

Whatever. It just means that:

put "xxxx" into me
OR
set the text of me to "xxxx"

Is not 100% reliable. That maybe ok for you, but it makes me worried.  
The point is that it makes using that form of the statement  
unacceptable for me to use (ever) so I just use the slower form. It  
also means that when you write code you have to be aware that it may  
not work, depending, not on the code itself, but from the path it was  
called from. If you are happy with that, then good luck. I'm not, but  
I have one (slow) work-around so I live with it along with all the  
other bugs, it would be nice if someone would confirm the sharedText  
property aspect of it, but since I've been waiting since March, I  
guess that won't happen any time soon.
>
> What then is the point of you bringing up the matter again and  
> asking us to discuss if this behaviour is buggy, when you must know  
> full well that it has already been accepted as a bug?  Not only did  
> you not have to go to the trouble of entering this bug, according  
> to bugzilla you haven't even bothered to vote for it yourself!
>

Explained above.

> I fail to understand your conception of yourself as someone who  
> wants Runrev to do well.   Your words and actions on this list  
> suggest the opposite to me.
>

I just want bugs that are fundamental to the whole system to be fixed.

> I wish I had the magnanimty of Richard Gaskin.

I guess that Richard just reads my messages for what they are and  
does not take as personally as you seem to do.

All the Best
Dave