10 bugs in 2 minutes time!

[xbury.cs at clearstream.com]

Brian, 

>Then you should have evaluated the latest version of Rev before
>choosing it for a valuable project. It is not always wise to use the
>latest version of everything if your money is on the line. If you are
>so certain that the old Metacard IDE is better, use it.

I did that. That why I decided not to upgrade to RR at work. 
This is not a valuable project, it's just a plain simple vanila browser.
Naturally, since I needed a home license the only choice I had was 
RR Studio.

>I sympathize with wasting time on your own penny. But in a community
>where many people spend hours every week contributing and helping and
>bug hunting, to sound off about your 2 hours in BugZilla and your 1 day
>slippage in releasing a stack, it rings very hollow with me. I'm sure
>in your Supercard and HC days, you lost a day somewhere when your
>stacks got corrupted, for example. Rev ain't perfect, but you can't
>shake a stick at it's productivity just because you found some geometry
>bugs.

If I had this geometry bug hit my Migration tool, it would take at least 
one whole 
week to resize everything...
But I have backups, I have mirrors, I have RDFs, I have every fool proof 
feature built-in in production at work. MC is for work, RR is for fun 
IMOHO.
Dont take me wrong. RR is capable but with the GUI bugs, I'd rather not
try. 

I've seen how RR changes scripts without asking, the debugger doesn't 
update variable watcher values, and that's way too much already...

>> As for our enterprise license, I dare not put RR in our production
>> network! It's that bad!
>
>Because the IDE has bugs? The engine is identical to MetaCard's.
>If geometry manager is your headache, maybe it's not ready for your
>needs. And maybe there are more workarounds. And maybe the bugs would
>be fixed by now if you hadn't been too stubborn to re-enter them in
>BugZilla a long time ago.

You can't negate that the IDE doesn't have bugs! ;)
But I dont see bugs in MC2.51, I just see them in RR... Im mean the IDE's 
GUI though.

Im not stubborn regarding bug entry. Im squeezed for my personal time and
research. If this was for work, I wouldn't mind taking my sweet time to 
entry
those bugs in a clear description for all it's worth. Scott knows this.

>> There would be twice as many issues which I dont have in MC. It's been
>> running so
>> smoothly for the past 2 years that Scott has heard from me once (partly
>> thanks to my
>> own script editor)! ;)
>
>Then why don't you either stick with what was working, or actually help
>make Rev better in a constructive fashion?

replacetext was working in MC, it doesn't in RR... It does in the msg not 
in the scripts!
Resizing a group in MC works, not in RR... Is this for real? And the 
geometry mgr is
also acting up on this group with the zoom feature...

I'd like to help, seriously, but it's not on my private time for a stupid 
stack that it's gonna
happen. 

>> I feel like everyday is a battle to get things working in RR... I like
>> the
>> features but
>> I dont appreciate it's quality.
>
>Then join the process of helping improve it. That's a pretty unique
>empowerment that you won't find with many major tools.
>If you don't have time to contribute to the community, why should it
>jump to support you above and beyond others?

Like I said, I bought the studio for fun and personal development. 
I do want to improve it (like for a super script editor and adding XOS
objects to the environment (save another 90% time development)
 but there is little motivation or need for this right now. So be it...



>- Brian
>
>_______________________________________________
>use-revolution mailing list
>use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution


Visit us at http://www.clearstream.com
                                                          
IMPORTANT MESSAGE

Internet communications are not secure and therefore Clearstream International does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this message.

The information contained in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any views expressed in this e-mail are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Clearstream International or of any of its affiliates or subsidiaries.

END OF DISCLAIMER