Speaking only for myself (whose attitude I assume you didn't understand), I'm talking about letting by-gones be by-gones, considering it water under the bridge, what's past is past, etc. Let's move forward and judge based on what 's done now as much as what's been done in the past. As I said, > > If future similar situations are addressed similarly, that's > > great news for those of us remaining committed to JRun.
If the damage to anyone's faith and hope is irreparable, then so be it. I'll just assert that as a beta tester of JRun 4 (and observer of the growth in the standards-support of the product through 3 and 3.1), it seems that the resources being dedicated to JRun and the improvements in the product are such that we have much to look forward to. And as was asserted by later notes today, sometimes problems like this are found to be caused by entirely unexpected situations--and sometimes not even the fault of the vendor. But as you said in a later note, let's not debate it. As I said, I just want to have a hopeful outlook about the future. Maybe it's a little pollyanna, but so be it. :-) I certainly don't mean to diminish the importance of the problem or its severity for those who suffered it. /charlie > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeff Ramin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:24 AM > To: JRun-Talk > Subject: Re: Difficult To Reproduce Session Issue > > > ???????? > > 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 > > ______________________________________________________________________ This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/jrun-talk@houseoffusion.com/ Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
