[BEGIN RANT]

I just got a case update that IBI will not document the API parameter IBIMR_defer_params.

It amazes me that they will not do this, its just documentation, its not fixing a bug or adding new features.

This parameter is something I found that resolved an issue I had in a custom front end to MRE I built. It gave the ability to store the parameters of a report with the deferred call in the users MRE profile.

This gave me the ability to build a custom interface for deferred report, showing more pertinent information for the deferred job that also fitted the design and style of the application.

And surprisingly seems much quicker than the MRE deferred status page.

The email I got stated:

quote:

Thank you for bringing this problem/new feature to our attention. Wehave
reviewed it with our engineering staff and it has been determined that it
will not be implemented at this time.

This was not a problen or new feature, its documentation.

Am I using an API parameter that secret and dangerous, I don't think so.

I've been getting the emails like this for a while, all the previous ones were for enhancements, but this one just riles me up.

Better Documentation means better understanding and increased use.
[END RANT]

Has anyone else been getting these emails?, I think Techsupport is clearing out old requests.



I think I feel better now.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Waz,

Yup. I've gotten a series of such "nogo" messages over the past few weeks, some for cases years old (where I no longer even have access to the client's cases).

But I also got a couple informing me that the solution to an issue I raised is in testing.

Win some/lose some.

I also received a few of these for new feature requests I made years and months ago. According to my local branch contact, they're doing us a favour by closing these cases, as now we won't be waiting on tenterhooks ("in a state of uncomfortable suspense") for a resolution that may never come.

Meanwhile, they may not want to document that parameter because it may not be available in WF 8 - just speculatin'...

quote:

may not be available in WF 8

I hope it is, otherwise I'll have to rewrite the interface.