Hello Mary, On Saturday, 25 June 2005, 07:58 PM, you (Mary Bull) wrote:
> > Okay, makes it a bit clearer, but why is there a need to ask? They > > see if new bugs will be mentioned and get feedback to the fixed > > things - so thy have everything they need to decide on their own. > > Well, not quite everything; as I said, I think he wants to write an > msi wrap and get .31 up so new users (and upgrading regular users) > will at least have the BayesIt function working. BayesIt functionality is very important, you're right. But who knows what else did break with the new version. BayesIt error was detected a few days later after the release - not after a few hours. I would have suggested to wait a day or too and see for error-reports. If everything's fine then, Maxim could have asked. :) For me, this question seems a bit "indecisive" (don't know if that fits correctly here, sorry.)! > "All things are equal, but some things are more equal than others." ;) Nice saying. :) > This is not a new version but a fix. And it went up before sufficient > time was allowed to test the 3.5.30 msi. In that way, it went up with > BayesIt--which was working in 3.5.26--broken. "Sufficient time" - that's the expression, that is interpreted in very different ways from all of us. ;) > And several of us have called this to Maxim's attention, and he > promised to put it back in the next msi, and then several of us have > since posted to him not to forget doing that. The correct way. I doubt, Maxim would have forgotten to put it in even without the monitions. ;) > And since, in doing that, he might--being human--introduce some other > error, we need to have a look at the .31 msi for a good many hours > before it is put on the public download page as the latest "write" of > v. 3.5. You always write about a .31 msi. I didn't read anything about a msi in Maxims question. So if the question by Maxim implies that we first will have a look (defined by me: at least one day. :D) at the new .31 wrapped in a msi, than I'll stand still and will be quiet immediately... > You may be sure that if he doesn't, he will hear from, at least, me. I > am trying to look out for Maxim's and for RitLab's best interest all > the time, wearing both my hats, as customer and as beta tester. :) Nice Mary. I'll stand with you. > And I think you are doing that, too, Manuel!! Heyho, yes I'll do. > 9Val is a developer, isn't he? It seems to me he is one. A very good and competent one. To make one thing clear here: I don't want to argue with Rit, nor want to start something like the "flame-wars" we've sometimes seen on this list. It was just a note, that me didn't really understand the question, nor it's origin. -- Manuel, http://www.manuel-breitfeld.de ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.5.31 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
