Internetworkers: http://www.ibiblio.org/internetworkers/

["Tanner Lovelace" <clubjuggler AT gmail.com>]

On 3/5/07, Michael Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 2007, at 11:21 AM, Cristóbal Palmer wrote:
>
> > On 3/5/07, Michael Czeiszperger <michael AT czeiszperger.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> but in the years we've
> >> used it have never encountered a single bug.  We've filed some
> >> requests for new features, but never a bug.
> >
> > Then your company doesn't make great use of it, or you're lucky enough
> > to have never encountered an edge case. Neither case says that much
> > about the software. If you haven't used it enough to see its flaws,
> > you haven't used it enough to endorse it.
>
> Gosh, you know so much about it from so little information.
>
> > UNC-CH SILS Student -- ils.unc.edu/~cmpalmer
>
> That explains so much...

Michael,

Ad-hominem attacks not only contribute nothing to the discussion,
they actively hurt it.  Please refrain from them.

As a software engineer, myself, though, with almost 15 years
of experience, and as someone who has set up and run several
wiki setups, I have to agree with Cristobal.  If you haven't yet
found bugs in a product, then you haven't looked hard enough.
Software is too complex to not have any bugs at all.  I wish
that were not true, but it is.  Your "endorsement" however,
glosses over that and makes it seem like it's bug free.

Now, I freely admit I've never used the product, and I make
no judgment at all as to exactly how bug free it is, but I
can guarantee that it is not completely bug free.

Cheers,
Tanner


--
Tanner Lovelace
clubjuggler at gmail dot com
http://wtl.wayfarer.org/
(fieldless) In fess two roundels in pale, a billet fesswise and an
increscent, all sable.