[scribus] Buggy Software!
chappa-ai at q.com
Tue Jul 12 03:15:31 UTC 2011
If it's "not stable", then why is it considered a release "candidate"??
On Jul 11, 2011, at 2:52 PM, Craig Bradney wrote:
> On 7/11/11 6:36 PM, Mike Sleger wrote:
>> Incidentally, to back up this opinion, just take a look at the quantity of bug reports and feature requests: 1474 at the moment. Seems rather high, yes?
>> On Jul 11, 2011, at 10:34 AM, Mike Sleger wrote:
>>> Well, I was just (again!!) reminded of the importance of saving a Scribus document every few seconds this bug-ridden application. 1.4.0.rc5 on OS X 10.6.8, a text frame with multiple styles applied to multiple paragraphs, then copy that text frame and link the copy to the first frame, and *poof*....all styles are removed, and all custom kerning values reset to zero. Of course, using the worthless Undo "feature" does not undo the corruption. So, now I get to go back and redo all the custom kerning that I had completed. (Serves me right for not saving between finishing the kerning and then performing actions on the text frame, which seem inherently buggy to begin with.) I do understand this is free open-source software (i.e., "use at your own risk"), but dang it people, can you please test it more thoroughly before committing??? This kind of code performance just would not fly in a corporate environment - trust me, I know...it's my career.
> You might also consider the 8000+ closed, and how many of those "open"
> bugs are RFEs, and... how absolutely useless your "bug report" is
> without further information.. so, unless by chance it gets fixed, it
> will slide right on through to 1.4.0 release.
> .. and consider how *$%^!@- rude you are. Get off your high horse, and
> start coding or start writing useful bug reports. Also.. why aren't you
> using our stable release for important work?
> Scribus Mailing List: scribus at lists.scribus.net
> Edit your options or unsubscribe:
> See also:
More information about the scribus