Mr Green,

I have no trouble at all with the fact that fixes (or other stuff possibly) is made available on the web as soon as it is ready. That is a good thing, to be sure.

But I have lots of trouble with your statement: "Fixes to things like the Setup Wizard and other things written in VFP itself will typically not ship in Service Packs".

What this is saying is that I have to perpetually have my VFP system in a state of flux which is likely inconsistent with any other VFP system on the planet. This is good for neither me nor for you - problems which I may report may well be as a result of *my* particular VFP 'configuration' (of software) or possibly even because I mis-applied some web-only available piece of maintenance.

As I previously wrote, I am the kind who is willing to wait for a CD-ROM and to apply it fully when it arrives. I take comfort in having a stable system which has only recognized fixes applied in the correct way from authorized sources. And by the way, I have seen some rather sketchy, as well as several erroneous, descriptions of steps required to successfully apply some "patch". Things like'create three directories named yadda-yadda-yadda' and then finding that there are only file for two of them. All manner of inconsistencies, from whoever.

If the foregoing is truly your policy, then I earnestly hope that you will reconsider it, even if these things are only included as a separate (set of) file(s) on the Service Pack and it takes a README to communicate their correct location and application.

Regards,

Jim N

>Jim,
>
>Fixes to the EXE or DLLs etc ship in Service Packs. And as I said, we don't have anything ready to ship yet. Fixes to things like the Setup Wizard and other things written in VFP itself will typically not ship in Service Packs. They will be available on the Web. A big benefit to this is that we get to release them as soon as they are ready and you get the updates sooner.
>
>Robert
>
>>Mr. Green,
>>
>>Can we realistically expect that there will at sometime be Service Packs which *also* include VFP or will we continue to obtain our 'maintenance' separately from the "integrated product"? For instance, why doesn't the SP2 include the stuff *now* separately available from MS for VFP?
>>
>>I have Visual Studio Enterprise and would by far prefer that *ALL* maintenance was centralized and coordinated. I am willing to await delivery of the CD to apply it. I find that separate maintenance is bothersome and leads to confusion as to the actual "level" of the STUDIO componentry.
>>
>>Regards,
>>
>>Jim N
>>
>>>We always recommend you install Visual Studio Service Packs, even if there are no specific fixes for VFP. This is so you get the latest version of various runtimes and controls etc that VFP uses.
>>>
>>>As you have noticed, there are no specific fixes for VFP in this service pack. We are working on some things, specifically the blocking problem in MTS and also hopefully making progress on the C000005 and HP issues many of you have run into. They aren't ready to be released yet and that is why they aren't in SP2. We realize this is frustrating to many of you, but we can't ship any updates until they are finished and fully tested. When that happens we will get an update to you as soon as we can. Until then, we can only ask for your patience and understanding.
>>>
>>>Robert Green
>>>Visual FoxPro Product Manager
>>>Microsoft
>>>
>>>>So I've heard. The blurb on the MS site specifically mentions VFP6 but others have posted on the UT that there were seemingly no VFP files when the unzipped it...hmmm.....
>>>>
>>>>>Hi, I'm very interested in finding the runtime files of VFP6 was but i can't seem to find it when i installed the Core. Thanks.
>>>>>
>>>>>>Microsoft has released VS6 SP2 for download. There is a Core download and a Full download. It appears that the Core will suffice for VFP6 and, yes, VFP6 runtime files are specifically mentioned as benefiting from this SP.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Find out more at: http://msdn.microsoft.com