>At 01:07 PM 4/24/00 -0700, Paul Burchfield said: Everything that was changed/corrected was listed on that Web page.
Paul, I am outraged at genealogy.com's disregard for several of the "issues" (which I call bugs) with version 3.0. Please pass back to your management my personal feelings that it is irresponsible for you to have fixed only a few of the bugs in 3.0 when many of those remaining appear to me to be trivial to repair.This is especially true of the one in the tombstone calculator, which worked fine before version 3.0 was released (so presumably you have some good code lying around).We have waited SO LONG for a bug-fix update I feel we users deserve better treatment.
I for one will be very interested in the rationale that genealogy.com's representative presents at the joint RUG meeting at the NGS conference next month.
To bring other readers up to date, I compared the list of "issues" that genealogy.com announced were "addressed" in the 3.1 release with the list that I have been maintaining.I found the following bugs were not mentioned, and having asked Paul Burchfield if they were fixed or not he reported that the only ones fixed were those on the "issues" list.
Readers should note that many of these problems were reported months ago.It seems to me, as a computer programming professional, that only items a, e and g would require more than trivial resources to correct, and these ought to be corrected anyway since they can be the source of considerable waste of user resources in trying to fathom the erroneous results.
Here is the list:
a. List reports of "how used" for sources are frequently in error. Reported 11 March 2000.
b. A "+" in the midst of an abbrev 1 for a source causes it to be identified as a default in evidence screens.Reported 2/13/2000.
c. Two sources used in a citation in text cause the check routine to incorrectly report an error.Reported 2/9/2000.
d. The well-known tombstone calculator bug, reported many times.
e. Exporting a GEDCOM with "use list" selected results in all images in the data base being exported rather than just those associated with the selected individuals and events. Reported 8/23/1999.
f. Wrong images are being exported to journal reports for an individual when there is an event with an image bearing the same number as the individual.Reported 8/17/1999. [This causes my #2 son to appear as a headstone!]
g. The resolution of images on box charts is exceedingly coarse, looks like dithering has been used. Reported 8/16/1999.
h. The search narrative for search - individuals - range doesn't change until the search is completed.Reported 7/28/1999.
i. Event flags A, B and C are referred to as X, Y and Z in the event list report field list.Reported 7/6/1999.
I am curious if other users feel as I do.Am I expecting too much? I am posting this message on the message board to elicit further commentary.