Re: ZipGS CDA bug-- new version available!

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Jeff Blakeney writes ...
> 
> On Wed, 12 Apr 2000 08:05:05 -0500, Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>
> wrote:
> 
> >That's nice. However, if you patch the v1.3 zipda CDA you do not really
> >have the v1.3 CDA anymore. If no other changes are made, lots of owners are
> >going to end up wondering whether or not they have the patched version.
> 
> Well, the fact that it wasn't an upgrade means the version number
> doesn't change.  What are you going to do if a new, official version
> gets released that uses the version number you've decided to use?

     That, one suspects, is one of those "we'll cross that bridge when we get
to it" situations.


> Talk about confusing.

     Nearly all of the confusion would reside within anyone daffy enough to
name any new zipda version with the same three-digit revision number as one
which exists.


> Besides, it isn't your program so you can't go
> around changing version numbers.

     Not officially, true enough. Anyone who prefers the older version with no
debug status info and credits should stick with the 'officially' numbered
version.


> 
> As to people being confused by the version on Delphi and giving credit
> where credit is due, the description clearly states that it is a
> patched version and gives credit to both Zip Technologies for the
> original disk and Greg Templeman for his patches.

     A text file which accompanies a changed CDA is better than nothing.
However, it is much better to have the credits available inside the CDA via the
"About" option as intended by the original designers.

     Similarly, it is useful to clearly indicate within the CDA that _This_
version includes the bug fix.


> Also, if you do a
> Icon Info on the CDEV (unfortunately this doesn't work with the CDA or
> other programs) you are told that the CDEV has "Bug fixes/revisions by
> Greg Templeman".
 ....

     According to Greg, he actually rewrote that CDEV. Based upon just a size
comparison, it seems obvious that he did. It is good to have a working version.
Even so, it is unclear why anyone would wish to use the CDEV instead of the CDA
for controlling the ZipGS.



Rubywand