>>IMHO:
>>IF a bug prevents a developer from being able to meet business requirements for a client without a) using a previous version or b) purchasing a separate product or tool, or c) time-consuming redesign to incorporate a workaround AND that business requirement can be reasonably expected to be met via development using the same product with incorporating a, b, or c above based on prior capabilities of the product or marketing, then that is a bug (even if it is a single bug) that justifies a suppport pack. Eitherwise, the developer will be forced to use a different tool that will meet the requirements and then why go back?
>
>That looks pretty comprehensive. Of course "de facto," I usually only think of "critical" bugs as the ones in the runtime environment, which affect (or will affect via an upgrade) my users. As a developer, I can usually put up with some problems and workarounds. All software has some problems...
>
>I haven't seen any issues I regard as "critical" (as in needing an SP) in vfp8 as of yet.
>
>And then, I would also count as a "critical bug" the need for an SP. Rolling out new SPs can be worse than most of the bugs they fix, for some of us...

Bruce;

I remember how much I liked VFP 6.0, but it did not "behave" very well until service pack 3 was released for what I was doing. Gee how I missed that "Blue Screen of Death"! :)

Tom