Jan Schaumann wrote: > > Peter Szekszardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [snip] > > Patches that provide additional functions may be considered, but there > > is no doubt that bugfix patches should be applyed into blacbox. > > Which ones are those - as I said, I have not encountered any problems > that would require me to patch the source. If there are serious bugs > and patches are available, then, sure, they should be included. But > it's always (as especially seen on this list) the dicussion of "Bug vs. > Feature".
As I wrote a few weeks (months?) ago, there ARE bugs in bb. The workspace change crash IS a bug. (I hope nobody consider it as a feature). If you don't use slowly redrawing apps and/or don't change workspaces quickly, this may never happen on your system. But there are many people on this list (including myself) who had this kind of chrash, dumping bb core. This is a fact. I don't want to discuss it more, everyone can access the list archive and find details on it. There are other minor issues with bb that cannot be considered as a feature. (I wrote some of them to the list, see the archive.) There is no patch for at least some of these issues, only workarounds. It is clearly a development task to address these problems. Continuous development is a vital point of any kind of software. There is no software in the world without bugs (excluding the "Hello World!"- like astro-scientific applications). So, what is the question we talk about? Don't misunderstand me, I do not need additional features, I even do not use patches for bb. But I would like to see at least a minimal development effort to make bb better. (Sorry, I do not have any C++ knowledge. Maybe I'll learn this language in the future.) I can't belive that anybody will claim here that the deveolpment of bb is not wanted anymore. We can live with the current (great) release, but I'm sure, everybody would be happy to be able to install a new version. -- Laszlo Gerencser PortoLogic Ltd.
