Re: [NF] Broken Windows
At 04:08 2018-10-24, Ted Roche wrote: [snip] "Throw it over the wall and see how loud they scream" is not a testing methodology. Sure it is. It works great for testing a heuristic-based targeting system. Sincerely, Gene "straight over or with a bit of a curve?" Wirchenko ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/65e4eb8d42f751a4dd199d6757d4b4a1@mtlp84 ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: .h files included or excluded in your project?
No, not useful at all, except if you want to make the EXE bigger and allow decompiling them too. Regards, Fernando D Bozzo El mié., 24 oct. 2018 19:32, escribió: > VFP9SP2 > > Since .h #INCLUDE files are only utilized at build time, is there any > reason you'd want to include the .h files in the EXE? I'm thinking > "no." > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAGQ_Jum1bV95anZ5gu+Qe-CiMAPJFF4JQ=k_a-dxrf_qf-g...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
.h files included or excluded in your project?
VFP9SP2 Since .h #INCLUDE files are only utilized at build time, is there any reason you'd want to include the .h files in the EXE? I'm thinking "no." ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/f895d8b4c2d4e8d569b20df7a06ae...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: [NF] Broken Windows
"Throw it over the wall and see how loud they scream" is not a testing methodology. Love it! John Weller ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/007a01d46bb3$9b0d11b0$d1273510$@johnweller.co.uk ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control
Another good thought. I'm also cruising through the WW docs since Rick has an image handling DLL as part of the package. If I go this route I probably have to write my own wrapper around the Windows API calls since most of what I've seen so far are more for manipulation of the image as opposed to a UI component I can just swap in for the standard OLE control. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Alan Bourke Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:33 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Re: Replacement for standard OLE image control The GDIPlusX project on Github (https://github.com/VFPX/GDIPlusX/blob/master/documents/GDIPlusX_Library_Reference.md) might have something. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/bn6pr10mb1299158bbdfaddd1a122600fd2...@bn6pr10mb1299.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Replacement for standard OLE image control
The GDIPlusX project on Github (https://github.com/VFPX/GDIPlusX/blob/master/documents/GDIPlusX_Library_Reference.md) might have something. -- Alan Bourke alanpbourke (at) fastmail (dot) fm ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1540395193.2084265.1553161256.7794c...@webmail.messagingengine.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control
Thanks, Ted. I was thinking of trying the browser control. I'm still not certain that any graphics handling that VFP might call is going to do anything other than use the image handling code from Windows 3.x but it's worth a shot. Peter, I have it set to isometric so the problem is not caused by stretching or clipping. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Ted Roche Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 11:10 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Re: Replacement for standard OLE image control It's overkill, but you could embed a webbrowser control. MS and other vendors have a bad habit of shipping proof of concept controls we base production applications on, or go out of business or otherwise cease supporting an app, but it's unlikely MS will go out of the browser business, much as we might like them to. At least as a debugging tool, it might tell you if it's the app, the FoxPro host, or that maybe the client's video adapter is set to 16-bit rather than 24-. On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:44 AM Richard Kaye wrote: > Thanks for the reply, Tracy. > > Very high res images but some display fine while others pixelate. I am > storing directly in the file system with no transforms. They look fine > if you preview in OS but the ancient OLE image control doesn't like something. > The tricky part has been determining just what that something is; > perhaps number of colors in the JPG but so far we just haven't been > able to figure out what the breaking factor is. Which is why I was > hoping there might be a 3rd party COM control out there that others > here have used. The DBI controls focus more on composite controls like > calendar. No luck yet finding an out of the box image control. > > -- > > rk > > -Original Message- > From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Tracy > Pearson > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 10:11 AM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control > > I use the built in image control to view imported pictures. > I use an old LeadTools product to resize the image to 800x600 before > storing it. > Is your customers images from a 12 megapixel or higher camera? > > You could use one of the available ways to reduce the image size for > displaying in your normal form. Then have a way to view the full size image. > Enabling scrollbars on a form? > > Good luck on your quest. > > Tracy > > > -Original Message- > From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of > Richard Kaye > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 6:21 PM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: Replacement for standard OLE image control > > I wish this had come up when I was at SWFox last week... > > As we all should know, the VFP OLE image control is...a bit long in > the tooth. I just ran across an issue today with a client who was > complaining that just recently some of his beautiful images are > turning into pixelated goo. Of course, trying to figure out what is > the underlying root cause is problematic at best. The display > mechanism is reading a file from disk and using it as the source for a > standard VFP OLE image control. So whilst I once again start my > research out on the greater internet, I look to the collective wisdom > here. Anybody using a 3rd party image control that does not have the > underlying problems that come with using a native Windows control > stuck in ~2003? Or otherwise have any other solutions for displaying JPGs in > their UI? > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/bn6pr10mb1299c7cb0ff8415493b1ae16d2...@bn6pr10mb1299.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Replacement for standard OLE image control
It's overkill, but you could embed a webbrowser control. MS and other vendors have a bad habit of shipping proof of concept controls we base production applications on, or go out of business or otherwise cease supporting an app, but it's unlikely MS will go out of the browser business, much as we might like them to. At least as a debugging tool, it might tell you if it's the app, the FoxPro host, or that maybe the client's video adapter is set to 16-bit rather than 24-. On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 10:44 AM Richard Kaye wrote: > Thanks for the reply, Tracy. > > Very high res images but some display fine while others pixelate. I am > storing directly in the file system with no transforms. They look fine if > you preview in OS but the ancient OLE image control doesn't like something. > The tricky part has been determining just what that something is; perhaps > number of colors in the JPG but so far we just haven't been able to figure > out what the breaking factor is. Which is why I was hoping there might be a > 3rd party COM control out there that others here have used. The DBI > controls focus more on composite controls like calendar. No luck yet > finding an out of the box image control. > > -- > > rk > > -Original Message- > From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Tracy Pearson > Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 10:11 AM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control > > I use the built in image control to view imported pictures. > I use an old LeadTools product to resize the image to 800x600 before > storing it. > Is your customers images from a 12 megapixel or higher camera? > > You could use one of the available ways to reduce the image size for > displaying in your normal form. Then have a way to view the full size image. > Enabling scrollbars on a form? > > Good luck on your quest. > > Tracy > > > -Original Message- > From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of > Richard Kaye > Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 6:21 PM > To: profoxt...@leafe.com > Subject: Replacement for standard OLE image control > > I wish this had come up when I was at SWFox last week... > > As we all should know, the VFP OLE image control is...a bit long in the > tooth. I just ran across an issue today with a client who was complaining > that just recently some of his beautiful images are turning into pixelated > goo. Of course, trying to figure out what is the underlying root cause is > problematic at best. The display mechanism is reading a file from disk and > using it as the source for a standard VFP OLE image control. So whilst I > once again start my research out on the greater internet, I look to the > collective wisdom here. Anybody using a 3rd party image control that does > not have the underlying problems that come with using a native Windows > control stuck in ~2003? Or otherwise have any other solutions for > displaying JPGs in their UI? > > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4tCWW5HKeYE0ELZ7b8hs=mhtpzvxg7bwne4bklszii...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: Replacement for standard OLE image control
On 24/10/2018 15:43, Richard Kaye wrote: Thanks for the reply, Tracy. Very high res images but some display fine while others pixelate. I am storing directly in the file system with no transforms. They look fine if you preview in OS but the ancient OLE image control doesn't like something. The tricky part has been determining just what that something is; perhaps number of colors in the JPG but so far we just haven't been able to figure out what the breaking factor is. Which is why I was hoping there might be a 3rd party COM control out there that others here have used. The DBI controls focus more on composite controls like calendar. No luck yet finding an out of the box image control. What do you have for the 'stretch' setting on the control? There is clip (default), isometric and stretch. I use isometric on a few screens and never had a problem with pixelating. I used to get an occasional problem with JPG output from adobe illustrator where the picture would appear black in Foxpro but no problems viewing from the O/S. We just got them to save it a different way and that fixed it. Peter This communication is intended for the person or organisation to whom it is addressed. The contents are confidential and may be protected in law. Unauthorised use, copying or disclosure of any of it may be unlawful. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by telephone or email. www.whisperingsmith.com Whispering Smith Ltd Head Office:61 Great Ducie Street, Manchester M3 1RR. Tel:0161 831 3700 Fax:0161 831 3715 London Office: 101 St. Martin's Lane,London, WC2N 4AZ Tel:0207 299 7960 ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/64c8956c-be89-bb26-2f32-ab8ec6f44...@whisperingsmith.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control
Thanks for the reply, Tracy. Very high res images but some display fine while others pixelate. I am storing directly in the file system with no transforms. They look fine if you preview in OS but the ancient OLE image control doesn't like something. The tricky part has been determining just what that something is; perhaps number of colors in the JPG but so far we just haven't been able to figure out what the breaking factor is. Which is why I was hoping there might be a 3rd party COM control out there that others here have used. The DBI controls focus more on composite controls like calendar. No luck yet finding an out of the box image control. -- rk -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech On Behalf Of Tracy Pearson Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 10:11 AM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control I use the built in image control to view imported pictures. I use an old LeadTools product to resize the image to 800x600 before storing it. Is your customers images from a 12 megapixel or higher camera? You could use one of the available ways to reduce the image size for displaying in your normal form. Then have a way to view the full size image. Enabling scrollbars on a form? Good luck on your quest. Tracy -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 6:21 PM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Replacement for standard OLE image control I wish this had come up when I was at SWFox last week... As we all should know, the VFP OLE image control is...a bit long in the tooth. I just ran across an issue today with a client who was complaining that just recently some of his beautiful images are turning into pixelated goo. Of course, trying to figure out what is the underlying root cause is problematic at best. The display mechanism is reading a file from disk and using it as the source for a standard VFP OLE image control. So whilst I once again start my research out on the greater internet, I look to the collective wisdom here. Anybody using a 3rd party image control that does not have the underlying problems that come with using a native Windows control stuck in ~2003? Or otherwise have any other solutions for displaying JPGs in their UI? ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/bn6pr10mb129952a656a9ca15af918ecfd2...@bn6pr10mb1299.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Broken Windows
Testing is done differently today than it was 20 years ago. It doesn't replace real people from final testing but it does reduce their need on early bugs that is for sure. I don't allow your code to be saved if your code breaks the build we have in place. You get notified of it right after you submit it. On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 9:07 AM wrote: > On 2018-10-24 04:51, Alan Bourke wrote: > >> I think Windows has gotten too complex for MS to understand. Shadow > >> directories and fake redirections and everything dependent not on the > >> OS or > >> the File System, but the Registry, may just be a step too far. > > > > What's actually happened is described pretty well in this article - > > basically they laid off a load of traditional QA and testing > > professionals in 2014 and are now relying on some sort of crowdsourced > > bullshit for QA, using people who are on the beta releases, i.e.e > > fanboys. > > > > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/23/microsoft_windows_10_crisis/ > > > I heard this happening awhile back, when they laid off John Koziol (who > worked in Q/A there, didn't he?). No surprise. All that money (more > money than any other company perhaps) and they're too cheap to do > testing the right way. Ugh. > [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CAJidMYLF1ZDAieBO8U-ci=+z8dars9b5hxki-awbhqeepea...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
RE: Replacement for standard OLE image control
I use the built in image control to view imported pictures. I use an old LeadTools product to resize the image to 800x600 before storing it. Is your customers images from a 12 megapixel or higher camera? You could use one of the available ways to reduce the image size for displaying in your normal form. Then have a way to view the full size image. Enabling scrollbars on a form? Good luck on your quest. Tracy -Original Message- From: ProfoxTech [mailto:profoxtech-boun...@leafe.com] On Behalf Of Richard Kaye Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2018 6:21 PM To: profoxt...@leafe.com Subject: Replacement for standard OLE image control I wish this had come up when I was at SWFox last week... As we all should know, the VFP OLE image control is...a bit long in the tooth. I just ran across an issue today with a client who was complaining that just recently some of his beautiful images are turning into pixelated goo. Of course, trying to figure out what is the underlying root cause is problematic at best. The display mechanism is reading a file from disk and using it as the source for a standard VFP OLE image control. So whilst I once again start my research out on the greater internet, I look to the collective wisdom here. Anybody using a 3rd party image control that does not have the underlying problems that come with using a native Windows control stuck in ~2003? Or otherwise have any other solutions for displaying JPGs in their UI? TIA -- rk --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- [excessive quoting removed by server] ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/000301d46ba3$62e4a560$28adf020$@powerchurch.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Broken Windows
On 2018-10-24 04:51, Alan Bourke wrote: I think Windows has gotten too complex for MS to understand. Shadow directories and fake redirections and everything dependent not on the OS or the File System, but the Registry, may just be a step too far. What's actually happened is described pretty well in this article - basically they laid off a load of traditional QA and testing professionals in 2014 and are now relying on some sort of crowdsourced bullshit for QA, using people who are on the beta releases, i.e.e fanboys. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/23/microsoft_windows_10_crisis/ I heard this happening awhile back, when they laid off John Koziol (who worked in Q/A there, didn't he?). No surprise. All that money (more money than any other company perhaps) and they're too cheap to do testing the right way. Ugh. ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/95c422abcd447e807f1cbc7476496...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
CleverFox backup tool
Hey ProFox Community, Just wanted to give an endorsement to Rick Schummer's and Frank Perez' automatic VFP backup product, CleverFox: https://cleverfoxbackup.com/ I use it for some of the Sylvan franchisees I support and it's been great. Not only is it affordable but it's super easy too. I had a couple issues at the start but that was just my needing to learn how to properly install it. Took less than an hour for sure. It's come in handy too on a couple of occasions when they needed me to restore some data that got tainted/overwritten wrongly. Cheers! --Michael ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/9a0f3713a74e4b0e8fe5fb4a88bbd...@mbsoftwaresolutions.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Broken Windows
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 4:51 AM Alan Bourke wrote: > > What's actually happened is described pretty well in this article - > basically they laid off a load of traditional QA and testing professionals > in 2014 and are now relying on some sort of crowdsourced bullshit for QA, > using people who are on the beta releases, i.e.e fanboys. > > https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/23/microsoft_windows_10_crisis/ Thanks for the excellent link. Sorry to hear about the MS testers who got canned. I know the Fox engineers did some amazing work to get us a high quality product. It's funny how Linux can ship good code with crowd-sourced testing, and Apache and OpenSSH and the open-source communities that power DNS and email and the rest. I suspect there has been a long process of developing the protocols and processes to make that a success. And also that it's not just guys living in their parent's basements: RedHat and IBM and Dell and HP contribute their own software and have pretty serious engineering efforts. "Throw it over the wall and see how loud they scream" is not a testing methodology. -- Ted Roche Ted Roche & Associates, LLC http://www.tedroche.com --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- multipart/alternative text/plain (text body -- kept) text/html --- ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/CACW6n4u+hRiQOJA9mPw=odcwffnrsw0w50yt2nuhuvxgypn...@mail.gmail.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
Re: [NF] Broken Windows
> I think Windows has gotten too complex for MS to understand. Shadow > directories and fake redirections and everything dependent not on the OS or > the File System, but the Registry, may just be a step too far. What's actually happened is described pretty well in this article - basically they laid off a load of traditional QA and testing professionals in 2014 and are now relying on some sort of crowdsourced bullshit for QA, using people who are on the beta releases, i.e.e fanboys. https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/10/23/microsoft_windows_10_crisis/ ___ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://mail.leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/1540371091.1972180.1552749488.185df...@webmail.messagingengine.com ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
