Re: INFO-ADA Digest - 12 Feb 1998 (#1998-8)

[kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen)]

In article <dewar.887377152@merv>, dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) writes:
> Al said
> 
> <<There used to be a CASE tool vendor out west that had a policy of
> only calling a release a major release (i.e. version nnn.00) when
> the known (to them) bug list was down to zero.  Perhaps that company
> was one of the ancestors of the current Aonix?
>>>
> 
> Although this *sounds* like a good policy, it is actually unsound.

Regardless of whether the policy is good or bad, it is certainly
contrary to the industry norm, where the .0 versions are used for
the most new-feature laden (and thus the most buggy) releases. By
definition, the reason for the releases which do not have new features
is to fix bugs.

> Suppose Microsoft notices that in one rare situation, the color of one of
> the Win98 icons is not quite what was intended, but the icon is still
> perfectly readable. This is a bug, but we sure hope that Microsoft does
> not try to fix this the day before they release the final WIn98 code :-)

Well, that's not how we Macintosh fans feel :-).

Larry Kilgallen