"John A. Turner" <turner(a)blueskystudios.com> writes:
> I hope you don't mean that as harshly as it sounds. The whole point
> of the beta process is to beat on new features and (hopefully) help
> fix them.
> If you're only interested in code that's "right", wait for a release.
Well, I meant it strongly enough to indicate that I'm annoyed that an
odd definition of "progress" is present, and I think such annoyance is
justified.
I certainly expect new features to have bugs to be shaken out. But
tabs began appearing sometime in the early 21.2.teens, here we are at
.29, and today tabs can't even correlate with buffers present.
No, I don't expect code that's merely "right". This is a beta list,
after all, and I know that. I'm on it because I like/want/need some
of the features present in 21.2 and I'm pretty good at stressing
certain odd corners of XEmacs to uncover bugs; when things get bad
enough, as they unavoidably do, I just sit tight on N-1 and wait for
the N+1 version in hope of something less unstable. On the other
hand, a concept of "improvement" needs to be considered, not merely
"updated" and "different": I ask, in an honest and earnest tone,
whether the .29 state of tabs was tested at all, by anybody, for it to
be in this condition.
Andy, I don't mean to offend you personally, but one does have to
wonder what experimentation with a fix happens before it lands in CVS.
Is it any surprise that such wonderment exists, when tabs literally
don't work at all?
Regrets to any others I might have also offended.