[OS X TeX] Skim 1.4.7 - no help at all from Sourceforge

[Richard Seguin]

On Dec 8, 2013, at 11:22 PM, Richard Seguin <riseguin at earthlink.net> wrote:

> OK, I’ve created a “ticket”. Thanks Adam!
> 
> I have to say though, I’ve never had a more unpleasant experience reporting a software bug. Sourceforge makes you jump through too many hoops.
> 
> Richard


Well, I’m very disgusted. I created a bug “ticket" with this message:

> In versions through 1.4.6 there was a small message window that popped down from the toolbar for a fraction of a second while Skim was reloading a PDF file. It would say "Reloading document ..." In 1.4.7, this little window and message have disappeared.
> 
> This drop down message is very handy for LaTeX typesetting because it gives an immediate visual clue that the typeset happened with no errors and the PDF document is reloaded. It's absence is not convenient and a little distressing. I use BBEdit with Skim and an integration script to accomplish the typesetting. The script tells Skim to reload the PDF file if the typesetting happened with no errors.

My bug report was immediately closed with this explanation:

> That's not a bug, it's a feature.

So, I resubmitted it as a feature request with this message:

> In versions through 1.4.6 there was a small message window that popped down from the toolbar for a fraction of a second while Skim was reloading a PDF file. It would say "Reloading document ..." In 1.4.7, this little window and message have disappeared.
> 
> This drop down message is very handy for LaTeX typesetting because it gives an immediate visual clue that the typeset happened with no errors and the PDF document is reloaded. It's absence is not convenient and a little distressing. I use BBEdit with Skim and an integration script to accomplish the typesetting. The script tells Skim to reload the PDF file if the typesetting happened with no errors.
> 
> This was rejected as a bug report with the claim that this is a feature request. If a useful or necessary "feature" disappears from software with no notification in the usual public change logs, as with this case, then it is legitimate for the customer to assume that it disappeared unintentionally because of a bug.

My feature request was immediately swatted down with this explanation:

> The fact that it was explicitly removed should tell you that it was intentionally removed, and therefore that the removal itself was a feature. And as you may see from earlier requests, this for many users is in fact a feature. Therefore it should be clear that this request will not be honored.

If anyone else wants to take a crack at this Kafka-esque bureaucracy and logical universe, be my guest …

In the meantime, I might have to reevaluate the tools I’m using.

Richard Séguin