>Boy, the lengths some people go to "protect" a previously-stated 'position' - the one that SPs for VFP will be ONLY for fixes!

Ken stated in several threads that SPs are for fixes only.

>
>MS (the VFP Team) said the SP contained "enhancements". MS (the VFP Team) put a section in the README titled "improvements. . ." and you can still concoct a story that this was viewed by MS as a "bug".

"Enhancements" in this case is marketing speak. As for "improvements", they fixed something that didn't work, so the product was indeed improved.

I'm thinking back to VFP6 SP3, where multi-threaded DLLs. Many VFP users said "WOW! Look at this new functionality". Yes, it was new. But I know FOR A FACT that it was a bug with VFP6 that was fixed.

>
>What it looks like to us is what it is - an enhancement! I personally don't care what they might call it internally, if that's what it takes to get enhancements into SPs for VFP.
>
>It was an odd 'policy' when it was stated and if the VFP Team has "seen the light", that's a good thing, not a bad thing. Ask yourself, what other MS SPs are strictly for fixes? Any that I've seen always include enhancements and new features.

Again. It may look like a new enhancement to you and me, but it is definately a bug to MS.