Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!spdcc!tauxersvilli!alphalpha!nazgul
From: nazgul@alphalpha.com (Kee Hinckley)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apollo
Subject: Re: APRs (FLAME ON)
Message-ID: <1991Apr10.161625.28221@alphalpha.com>
Date: 10 Apr 91 16:16:25 GMT
References: <9104082143.AA24021@pan.ssec.honeywell.com> <1991Apr9.173756.24708@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>
Organization: asi
Lines: 28

In article <1991Apr9.173756.24708@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> system@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (System Admin (Mike Peterson)) writes:
>>3) Their response is that this is not a bug -- it is working within specs.
...
>I have had a bunch of APRs "resolved" with this now-classic response too -
>the person who thought up "working within specs" should have got a big pay

I have to agree that this is a rather obnoxious reply.  I suspect that
what they really mean to say is:

    This is a bug, but we are never going to have the time or resources
    to fix it.

That would be more straightforward.  I'm not sure how much happier
it would make people though.

Bugs like the one mentioned in lst (which by the way, was a known
bug years ago) simply never rise high enough in priority to get fixed
even in the best of times. I'd much rather see someone adding lst
options (-level comes to mind) to /bin/du than fixing bugs in lst.
I'd even more rather see OSF/1 on my 3500....
-- 
Alfalfa Software, Inc.          |       Poste:  The EMail for Unix
nazgul@alfalfa.com              |       Send Anything... Anywhere
617/646-7703 (voice/fax)        |       info@alfalfa.com

I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate
everyone else's.