<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Roof Surfacer - Standing Seam - &amp;quot;has GS fixed the bug issue&amp;quot; in Collaboration with other software</title>
    <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Roof-Surfacer-Standing-Seam-quot-has-GS-fixed-the-bug-issue-quot/m-p/276554#M36283</link>
    <description>&lt;DIV class="actalk-migrated-content"&gt;&lt;T&gt;just curious where this issue stands?&lt;BR /&gt;
I'd really like to employ the roof surfacer add-on to get a more realistic standing seam roof but not at the cost of it being so "buggy"...has GS been able to address this?&lt;/T&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:46:18 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>rob2218</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2016-04-14T17:46:18Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Roof Surfacer - Standing Seam - "has GS fixed the bug issue"</title>
      <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Roof-Surfacer-Standing-Seam-quot-has-GS-fixed-the-bug-issue-quot/m-p/276554#M36283</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV class="actalk-migrated-content"&gt;&lt;T&gt;just curious where this issue stands?&lt;BR /&gt;
I'd really like to employ the roof surfacer add-on to get a more realistic standing seam roof but not at the cost of it being so "buggy"...has GS been able to address this?&lt;/T&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Apr 2016 17:46:18 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/Roof-Surfacer-Standing-Seam-quot-has-GS-fixed-the-bug-issue-quot/m-p/276554#M36283</guid>
      <dc:creator>rob2218</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2016-04-14T17:46:18Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

