Re: Distribution script format second (stupid) question
Re: Distribution script format second (stupid) question
- Subject: Re: Distribution script format second (stupid) question
- From: Peter Bierman <email@hidden>
- Date: Thu, 6 Sep 2007 14:14:52 -0700
At 10:58 PM +0200 9/6/07, Stéphane Sudre wrote:
On mardi, septembre 4, 2007, at 09:39 PM, Peter Bierman wrote:
<installer-gui-script> was the element name
initially, but was simplified to
<installer-script> before 10.4 went GM.
Unfortunately, a lot of Apple software is built
from templates, and things that aren't actively
broken are low on the priority list for fixing.
Then the templates get copied, and things like
this linger for years.
Well, maybe it will bee sooner than later since
I filed a bug report against it...
But having seen bug reports in some parts of the
OS being addressed more than 3 years after their
submission, I don't have great expectancies
though.
It's a question of priorities. Do we change (and
re-test) something that isn't causing an actual
problem, or do we fix a bug that's bothering
someone?
These "correctness" bugs can end up languishing
for years. The oldest one in my own queue is from
1995 (and yes, still relevant, sigh.) On the
other side of that, I just had a bug returned to
me to verify as fixed that I filed in 1998.
But all bug reports are appreciated, even the low priority ones.
-pmb
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Installer-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden