Hello Zhenja!

11 Jan 20, Zhenja Kaliuta wrote to Mark lewis:

 ZK> But software may have bugs and it's sad to lose otherwise valid data
 ZK> because of that.

I don't want to accept that argument because there is no clear line what is "a
goog bug" that needs to be corrected by others and "a bad bug" that causes more
harm than being useful. And even "good bugs" would create a bunch of
workarounds with the risk of interferring each other by time.

It's like a water bucket with a small hole. You can workaround by adding water
up to full and run faster to your destination. Or you can place your hand on
the hole. With more holes you will have less water at the destination or you
need more hands to cover the holes. What do you do if there is no water in the
bucket when you arrived at the destination? Throw the bucket away and get a new
one? Or at last start fixing the holes?

 ZK> BTW, in RFC world it's pretty different. Ex.: rfc2045

If there is a better bucket throw away the old one and use the new one.

Regards

Kai

--- GoldED+/LNX 1.1.4.7