[NUG] *Re: API 2.0

[Jon Ogden]

> On Mar 14, 2019, at 10:31 AM, Jon Ogden via Nug <nug at xojousers.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Mar 14, 2019, at 10:09 AM, Norman Palardy <npalardy at great-white-software.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Mar 14, 2019, at 7:58 AM, Jon Ogden via Nug <nug at xojousers.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> My point exactly.  I had filed a bug report and it’s probably still open or closed as unreproducible.  The big gripe of most users is that instead of fixing things, Xojo just keeps going ahead and adding more stuff or changing stuff.  Take Serial Ports there’s a status bug with them as reported here: <feedback://showreport?report_id=14952>  In face the mailer doesn’t format Feedback links right it is case 14952.  This has been verified since 2015.  Verified.  Means that Xojo reproduced the bug.
>> 
>> No
>> It means "this behaves as described"
>> Verified isn't "Verified this is a bug"
>> Those statuses aren't clear in that regard and this is a constant source of pain and conflict internally and externally
>> It would be nice to have that status say "Verified this behaves as stated" or something much more complete and then extra statuses for "verified as a bug" or something
>> 
> 
> Norman, come one.  That’s a terrible excuse and it doesn’t make logical sense in probably 99% of the cases.  If a user documents something that is clearly different from what the documentation says and that clearly gives different results like it does in this case, then it’s clearly a bug.  Once Xojo verifies that something behaves improperly, then what else would you call it?  Swiss cheese?  Makes as much sense.  Maybe it’s too soon after being gone from Xojo and the Xojo Reality Distortion Field (XRDF) around you has not faded away enough yet.
> 
> Let’s see, “We have verified that this behavior as documented by the customer does indeed match what the customer claims.  It is not working as we describe in in the documentation nor is it working consistently.  But it’s not a bug.  We are calling it an undocumented feature.  Yeah, that’s it.  We just verified that the bad behavior you saw does occur.  But we are too busy building big new features to worry about what problems customer may have to work around.”
> 
Sorry responding to my own post, but I had something else to add that I forgot to write the first time!

I can guarantee you that if the behavior the user reports is verified but NOT a bug, that Xojo would close the case and mark it as not a bug and that the behavior is correct.  I’ve had it happen to me.  So it’s it’s not a bug, they wouldn’t just verify it and leave it open.

I like you Norman, but I can’t agree with your conclusions with this.