IMO, that is one of the reasons to have this process in the open. If you feel that the behavior is wrong you enter a defect, when another person believes your reasoning is wrong they contour that in there posting to the issue. At the end of the day, I suppose, it will be the people actually coding the portion of the project ( or their corporate bosses ) that will decide whether it is something needing change or not.
In other words if you feel that this is not an error and is how the application should behave then you should say so. Keeping in mind that this is an open environment again, start from the position that the other person is intelligent also, that they have most likely thought this through also, that they have come to a different conclusion then you have. I believe that is you approach it from this aspect then this type of collaborative effort generates the best possible end product. One other point, more from the aspect of the current poster, and not you in the rebuttal position. Some things don't really have a right and wrong answer, but others have a very specific action spelled out in a specification document, in that case I think you defer to the spec doc, and if you still feel strongly you attempt to have the published spec changed. Drew On 5/21/07, Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Question for the list. I'm in the process of confirming the above new issue however I'm not convinced that it is an issue in the first place. Whose job is it to say whether it is nor not. It does happen as per the reported issue, but I think that it is working as it should. Is it up us to decide or the developers? /paul -- Processing Key for cracking HD DVD's: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 ----- Try Torpark; a small portable, open-source, built on Firefox browser that enables anonymous browsing. Requires no installation : http://www.torrify.com/
