Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Bisma Jayadi wrote:
> >> Yes but most of the "problems" come from the fact that (besides Lazarus
> >> and FPC peoples work for free during their free time) Lazarus/FPC is
> >> multi-processors and multi-OS's whereas Delphi is only multi-Microsoft.
> >
> > No matter what are the reasons behind the lack of features, it still
> > lacks of features. Most people/users don't really care about this,
> > whether Lazarus/FPC people work on it during free time or busy time.
> > They just want some features to be exist, period.
> >
> > If Lazarus/FPC can't provide those features then simply admit it and be
> > fair. You could ask them to help or contribute to FPC/Lazarus instead of
> > (blindly) defend it with non-logical reasons or proferring other
> > features as excuses. If you said there are problems with Delphi, then
> > Lazarus is full with problems as well. For some people, Lazarus'
> > problems could prevent them of using it and stick with Delphi. None of
> > both is perfect.
> >
> > I use and like both Delphi and Lazarus. So, I'm not the one you should
> > shoot on the foot. I'm just comparing and hope we could learn something
> > from it.
>
> Can you please identify features that you are missing ?
> Alternatively, the bugtracker can be used to demand features, I think.
>
> If we don't know what you are missing, we can't improve it for you...
I think so too, but it's important to not turn people off by sending them to
bugtracker.
The core programmers should be able to fwd any new feature request to
bugtracker, after confirming its usefulness. This way, you reduce your
workload by filtering feature requests in realtime, instead of batching them
up. OTOH, any rejections should be reasoned.
Thanks!
--
Al
_________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe: mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
"unsubscribe" as the Subject
archives at http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailarchives
