>Yesterday, I made a suggestion for a UT enhancement via the Task Tracker. With all the recent posts about bugs, I came up with an idea that, IMV, would be better than having a specific category for them. This idea is outlined on the Task Tracker. Since people may make comments one the utility of such an idea, I would appreciate all interested parties in doing so.
>
>Naturally, whether or not this is actually implemented is up to Michel. One of the factors that I'm sure he'll consider is the utility of the enhancement. You can let him know your feelings by entering coments. Where appropriate, I will respond to such comments.

George,

Your idea is intriguing. I hope you also noticed my little suggestion in thread 645542, which complements it nicely. After all, any effort to compile a list of bugs would be well served by making it easier to search for and find reports of bugs. Actually, you deserve the credit for my idea too, having stated this in message 644256:

I think we've seen such a system at work here. Some one says they think they've found a bug. Someone else, from the steps the originator gives them, reproduces it. Another person finds a workaround. Having people from MS such as Jim Saunders, Mike Stewart and John Koziol, can then note it and get a jump start on the problem before its actually reported.

I simply added the suggestion that people be sure to include the key phrase "VFP Bug Report", and adhere to the convention of starting the message title with the word "Bug". This requires no further effort on the part of Michel, and more importantly, requires an infinitesimal expenditure of additional effort on the part of those who wish to report the discovery of a bug. Of course, I am not suggesting that people do this lightly, without taking the same degree of care they would in reporting a bug directly to Microsoft.

You also suggested that a new UT category might be introduced for bugs, but I think that is both unnecessary and undesirable, as previously noted in message 645551.

Another suggestion of yours that bears further consideration was the idea of using Fox Wiki as a repository for such a compendium. This strikes me as an excellent idea, because it would make it easy for all to participate directly in the maintenance of the bug list. No one is eager to take on such a large job on their own, nor should anyone be excluded from participating if they wish to.

Of course, any effort by Michel and company to facilitate this process would be most welcome, but let's not mix up two distinct aspects of the problem. First and foremost we should make it easier to for people to openly report and discuss bugs in an orderly fashion, making it vastly easier to find these bug reports. Second comes the editorial problem of compiling useful references to those discussions.

Mike