???????? I don't understand this attitude. We're talking about a very serious bug that Macromedia has known about for close to a year now. It got through their testing/release process twice. They had a similar "we will do whatever it takes to fix this problem" response in November, which resulted in a patch that didn't fix the problem.
I wouldn't call this a "great" response. More like feeble. If you're using JRun for development, or for an intranet where session affinity isn't important, then I can understand. But if you continue to use it in other environments, you are merely ignoring the issue. charles arehart wrote: > Wow, great way to respond to the issue. Thanks, Mike and Macromedia. > > Let's hope folks don't jump in with trite replies like "about time", etc. It > really won't add anything meaningful to the situation. If future similar > situations are addressed similarly, that's great news for those of us > remaining committed to JRun. > > /charlie > > -- Jeffrey Ramin Berbee 5520 Research Park Drive Madison, WI 53711 [EMAIL PROTECTED] 608.298.1024 Berbee...putting the E in business ______________________________________________________________________ Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/jrun-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
