In a bold display of creativity, forb wrote:
They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested. They released a faulty update that wasn't tested.
I may have missed something, since I wasn't specifically looking for that, but what makes you believe it wasn't tested? I can understand saying their QA process for updates needs to be expanded or whatever, but to say it wasn't tested is probably inaccurate unless Alfred or someone actually said so, which would be odd. -- Eric (the Deacon remix) _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
