>>
>>Any bug that jeopardizes data integrity is a critical bug, even if it happens only once every 9 months in any shop.
>
>It depends. If the bug only affects 1% of the user base, should it be fixed? It may be critical to you if the bug causes your data be corrupt, but if I'm not experiencing it, its not important to me and I'd rather have the resources spent on something that affects a larger percentage of the user base.

I've never been polled to learn if I have been affected by any specific bug. How one could even conclude such a ratio is a mystery. Great theory but really an excuse in disguise.
And no, I don't think that you'd prefer that they work on a bug affecting a higher percentage of the population, even if there was a way to know. You'd prefer, as we ALL would, that hey work on YOUR BUGS that affect your applications.

>
>>
>>We have "service packs" and we have "hot fixes" and there no doubt are other mechanisms too. I've always wondered why MS couldn't release a fix (or group of them) when they were remedied rather than wait for a new release to let us have them.
>>
>
>There is currently a topic on the wiki that discusses this. I can't post the exact topic, because it contains an "obsenity", but if you bring up the RecentChanges, you'll see it.

On my way to check it out.

cheers