you are not privy to a company's internal processes.

I agree we don't need the numbers or the internal spreadsheets, but I think they should post a list of the fixes, at least the major ones. They publish the known issues in the ReadMe. Why not the known fixes? 

It can actually be more difficult (time consuming) than you might think to publish a list.  I don't know the Baker's system, but assuming that all bugs go into the same bucket, they would first have to separate out those that are reported internally (and which the user base may never see) from those reported by end users.  And depending on how thr fixes were incorporated, some bugs may reference other bugs, be duplicates, etc, etc.
 
I've worked for a large software company for almost 15 years and we've had the same exact request.   Just by chance I recently did just that for a special case, and it took me a few days to get that list together.  And this was for a minor patch.  After doing that I wouldn't want to touch a major release.
 

The README does contain fix information in addition to the known issues that they are willing to divulge (at least the last one in my X1 directory does). I am not sure if there is a consensus of what would be the "major ones." So it quickly becomes and all or nothing proposition. Could be interesting stuff though. Then again just because a vendor claims an issue is fixed, is it?

peregrine


My apologies to everyone.

Now, get back to work!

Yes SIR Mr Peregrine! At once Sir!

Bristol_Jonesey

peregrine


My apologies to everyone.

Now, get back to work!

Yes SIR Mr Peregrine! At once Sir!

That was a good response after all the bs we gave him!!


Well done!