Wolfgang Wieser wrote:
> 
>>- you have been visiting these newsgroups long enough to know the
>>correct proceedings of a bug report.  Still i can only find a single bug
>>report from you in povray.bugreports.
>>
> 
> If I post a patch against a bug in povray.programming and some member 
> of the POV team comments on it, then this must be enough. (Especially 
> if I am told that "it has been noted".)
> 
> If the POV team fails to include patches proposed this way, I do not 
> feel guilty for that. 
> 
> Especially note that in most cases I am not providing a "bug report" 
> but actually a "bug fix".

My advise in hopefully clear words: if you observe a problem using 
POV-Ray you should point this out in one of these newsgroups, if 
possible illustrated with reproducible examples.  If you think you have 
a solution for the problem you should of course include it as well (not 
as a patch but as an explanation what you think should be changed). 
After others had the opportunity to comment you should post this to 
.bugreports.  And even if you think all this is completely unnecessary 
and have no idea why anyone would make it that complicated it would 
still be a good idea to follow this.

> 
>>- there has been a several month long beta phase for POV-Ray 3.6 and i
>>don't remember any report from you in povray.beta-test.  The only
>>explanation i have for this is that you want to demonstrate the
>>necessity to release the source code to get useful feedback...
>>
> 
> Okay, so then please tell me how I could check if the "break;" in 
> the search loop was included from using the binary?

To make it perfectly clear your analysis of the source code is 
absolutely irrelevant here.  The beta test phase is about finding 
problems in the use of the program.  If you now find a 'problem' in the 
source that does not manifest itself in form of a problem for the user 
of the program it is completely unnecessary to change it.  The only 
problem you as it seems correctly pointed out is the parametric object 
one.  I don't want to speculate why others have not worked on this but 
the fact that the parametric object is classified experimental gives it 
relatively low priority in general.  The other things you write about in 
this thread you could have perfectly observed and reported during beta 
phase (and even if they are only 'cosmetic' things it would still have 
been good to point them out).

Christoph

-- 
POV-Ray tutorials, include files, Sim-POV,
HCR-Edit and more: http://www.tu-bs.de/~y0013390/
Last updated 01 May. 2004 _____./\/^>_*_<^\/\.______

Post a reply to this message