Wow I really set off a tempest here. BTW I (Mitch) did check to see if the
beta was up at least 10 times over w days, I asked about it and got no
response, so I finally posted a message tongue in cheek asking if this was
something done to make us low life users suffer. I did not call it a bug and
did not expect to generate so much venom for asking an innocent question. It
was a beta question (where is the beta) and the nuances of bugs vs.
questions about the beta is not extraordinarily clear from the name of this
group. Still I enjoy watching the flames fly on this post, its amazing how
much time people have to waste on my trivial question.


"Coridon Henshaw" <che### [at] sympaticoca> wrote in message
news:Xns### [at] 204213191226...
> "Thorsten Froehlich" <tho### [at] trfde> wrote in
> news:3c45ecc8@news.povray.org:
>
> > Oh, I could reproduce it on my Mac!  So it will be fixed in the next
> > beta. I had to make the code a bit harder to reverse engineer anyway so
> > simple patches like Ron uses for Windows won't work either...
>
> Might I suggest that there are more than enough legitimate bugs that are
> far more worthy of repair than rather than 'repairing' this useful
> workaround just to spite a poster who can't seem to check if a new beta
> versions has been uploaded?
>
> A little perspective would seem to be in order.

Post a reply to this message