On 19-07-18 14:40, Harry van der Wolf wrote: > > > Op do 18 jul. 2019 om 10:26 schreef Martin Trautmann <tr...@gmx.de > <mailto:tr...@gmx.de>>:
> I do not understand why it would have to be that way. > > > It doesn't have to be that way. It is simply one of the multiple ways: > using favorites, map markers, addresses, "search on map", shift every > possible (intermediate) point to another location or do it automatically > (salesman algorithm). > And who cares that it also calculates a new route immediately? You can > just continue adding/shifting points. > > It is just that this QA is so enormously stubborn that he only wants it > to work the old way. So I showed him one other way which I thought would > be most simple to him. It's good to learn about an alternative, if the old version does not work any longer. But to imply that you have to think and work in a certain way, for no other reason than a design flaw (?) that broke the other way - I do not agree here. Personally, I have my own problems with osmand, not keeping its destination. Whenever I enter a destination, but do not start immediately, the destination is gone and not even visible within the history - which would be the least where it should be kept. It happend both by leaving osmand with the back button, the home button or the jump to another app, but it did not happen every time. However, when I started the track and did any of those, the destination was kept, as expected. - Martin -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Osmand" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to osmand+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/2ceb8ec8-2c58-40cb-dd24-ec44e0685b56%40gmx.de.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
