On 5/18/07, Peter Alcibiades <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Chipp, I think you may be drawing the wrong lesson. Of course the bug you mention is not useful. The problem is that the database contains it. That tells you something. Bill's remark, that the database contains lots of stuff that is already fixed also tells you something. Its good news and bad news, its good about the bugs. Its less good about the database.
'That tells you something' -- perhaps I'm just slow, but I'm not sure what that tells me? 'its good news and bad news-good about the bugs, less good about the database' -Again, completely confused at the point you're trying to make. Just to be clear, I was advocating a responsible and logical approach for submitting and/or reporting bugs which if used would create even more integrity in the database. People have enormous goodwill towards Rev. They will accept realistic
targets that are met, even if those targets are less than what they want, and less than what the Rev team wants to deliver. I think part of what Joel is saying may be: pick a quantified realistic goal, communicate it, and stick to it and deliver it. Even if it not what people would have liked, they will like this approach to delivering a given quantity of work much better than any possible alternative.
Yeah, I know what you mean. I'm still upset about promises broke concerning flying cars and Dick Tracy watches ;-) _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
