-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mark,
On 06 February 2001 at 21:56:07 -0500 (which was 02:56 where I live)
Mark Knipfer wrote and made these points:
>> IMHO you probably won't. RITl labs have a strict policy of only
>> responding to the first originator of a new bug report.
MK> If this is true, then this may not provide other TB! users enough
MK> initiative to report program bugs and problems since their effort,
MK> time, and work is not worthwhile to RIT Labs.
While this is absolutely true and not acceptable for a large and fully
staffed software house, those of us that are more used to the lack of
response from the less well endowed labs accept that they are busy
guys and submit bug reports wherever we can to make their job easier,
with or without feedback ;-).
To be fair, "Showstopper" bugs that are "every time" issues are
usually fixed with a few days (if that long). There aren't many bugs
like that left in TB. For the most part, it's pretty stable software.
What's more, it does the job it's supposed to do *extremely* well
IMHO.
>> .. You are having a problem with the way the program has been
>> designed to work.
MK> I have never seen an e-mail client designed to adjust the message
MK> columns based on the Subject thread expansion.
Nor have I. I didn't say that it was a *good* design. Actually, the
consensus (even from me) is that it isn't. I'm just trying to say that
*this* issue (shifting subject when expanding threads) is down to an
incorrect design decision that we're kind of stuck with right now.
MK> This is the first ever. If this is not a bug and it is a design,
MK> then this should be referred to a design flaw.
Agreed.
MK> This reminds me of the Microsoft saying, "it is not a bug, but a
MK> feature." :)
LOL. Understood, but disagreed for the current context <g>.
MK> I keep reading general references about TB! v2 without any
MK> estimated time of releases or what may be in this version.
That's because all we have to go on are the published intentions of
RIT labs as specified in an interview last year and a trust that, once
the work has been done, we will be given the dates and schedules we're
all waiting for. It is the only opportunity we will see for
fundamental design flaws to be readdressed.
MK> I encountered two other bugs (or designs) in TB! 1.49 that will
MK> definitely crash TB! 1.49:
These are bugs for sure, not designs.
MK> #1:
<snip>
I can't confirm this one :-(.
MK> #2:
MK> (X) List index out of bounds.
Confirmed!
MK> ... After exiting and running TB! several times, I was able to
MK> read messages in the mail folders.
Pass. I've not seen this happen and don't know how to make it happen
from your description.
MK> After reading your first part of this message, this gives me no
MK> ambition and initiative to report these problems to RIT Labs since
MK> they will probably ignore them.
Don't get me wrong. I said "don't expect a response". I didn't say
"you'll be ignored". There's quite a bit of difference. They certainly
read them all and, if 1) the problem description is sufficient to
allow them to reproduce it and 2) if the fix isn't going to break
anything else or take an inordinate amount of time for the improvement
in functionality then they will try to make the repair.
<snip>
>> Why it does it this way has already been explained in fairly good
>> detail ...
MK> ... Could you cite the message from the TBUDL archives for me?
There have been several places where this behaviour has been
discussed. Firstly with TB v1.36
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 1999 13:11:16 -0500
From: Ali Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Message list comments.
... and the ensuing thread. This was a very early conversation on
exactly the same point as you are making. You can see by this how far
back the issue has been complained about - and there has not been a
single defender of this design.
Then there was this thread...
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 19:46:34 +0200
From: Oliver Sturm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Column width with threading
...and especially...
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 15:36:40 -0700
From: Ming-Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Column width with threading
... and an entire related thread.
Then, very recently ...
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2001 21:26:38 +1100
From: John Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Old Bat bug!
... and the ensuing explanations.
HTH.
- --
Cheers -- .\\arck D. Pearlstone -- Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA / TBTECH
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[ PGP Key ID: 0x929DCDA0 | www: http://www.silverstones.com ]
[ Any opinions are my own and not those of RIT labs ]
TB! v1.49e S/N 14F4B4B2 on Windows NT 5.0 Build 2195 Service Pack 1
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.5.8 Secured
Comment: PGP Sealed for freshness
iQA/AwUBOn9yPjnkJKuSnc2gEQIyTwCgr3Dkc+tBrKWo0gO+y70scDBhYS8AoKnV
y+fpTrSU7erEvu09wjPIxLlG
=1WYB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
______________________________________________________
Archives : <http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com>
Moderators : <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
TBTech List: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
