> > And I'll ask *you* then, is it still on track?
>
> Do give it a rest, just wait and see, and respect the wishes of the
> programmers. Dont keep asking stupid questions when they have
> specifically asked people not too. surely 2 or 3 weeks isn't too lomg
> to wait.
It's not a stupid question! Things slip, I acknowledge that. Chris has
said "2 weeks" and I'm seriously asking him if that's 2 weeks on THIS
planet, or two weeks on some other far away place where a day lasts
a year or so.
Just where do you come up with the dates? How do you know it's two
weeks? Is that an indication that it's all stabilised out, or is that an
estimate of when it probably WILL be?
What will you be doing in those two weeks? Do you take measures
to ensure that you don't add "new" features and potential NEW bugs
in those weeks, or do you just add and add until it you're happy that
it works?
I'm genuinely interested. I'm being as patient as I can without going
crazy about not being able to view sites which I *know* have been
fixed on internal versions.. I'm just wondering how realistic any date
that Olli or Chris gives out actually is..
--
Matt Sealey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Distributed Systems Support
Computer Centre
University of Leicester
____________________________________________________________
Voyager Mailing List - Info & Archive: http://www.vapor.com/
For Listserver Help: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "HELP"
To Unsubscribe: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "UNSUBSCRIBE"
