>>All I know is so much is being made of SP2, you'd think it was a skunk instead of a piece of software. Nothing is bug free.
>>
>>>I have decided that I can not trust sp2, and it is unlikely that I will go to all of the trouble to test a sp3 if by chance there was one.
>>>
>>>If you have similar reports in your apps, you may want to check them.
>>
>>I don't have any such reports.
>>
>>>In my opinion, this bug is going to bite a number of unsuspecting people. People who install VFP 9 and then sp2 but don't know about the issues with the report grouping may be printing incorrect reports and never know. Additionally, anyone who relies on a common set of VFP runtimes and has these type of reports will be bitten if the common runtimes are updated without their knowledge.
>>
>>Anyone who doesn't sufficiently test their stuff should be shot, instead of simply bitten. :)
>
>
>Define "sufficient" ;-(
>
>How many of us has the luxury of running a full regression test every time a service pack is released? Cathy has enough knowledge, expertise, and interest in the VFP report writer to have caught this. IMO that is an unusual case, not the usual case. Many of us would have missed it even if we had run a regression test.

I'm being tongue in cheek. The way some people are acting SP2 was spawned in some nether region of some gothic nightmare. We - as an industry - are not keeping sets of test data that produce known good results. We, IMO all too often start with live data, where none of us can eyeball the reports to see an incorrect total. That would be sufficient, but it is seldom done.

I've seen systems where hundreds of thousands of dollars were "misplaced" and where patients would actually be killed by the "design".

So give the FoxTeam some slack cause nobody and no programming is perfect.