Silvan wrote:
> William wrote on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 21:16:31 +0100
>> >> If nobody wants it, I'll have to write my own patch privately.
>> >
>> > Silvan wrote on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 20:09:08 -0400:
>> > So how is your forked version of Rosegarden coming along?
>>
>> In which future date are you living? :)
> 
> Well, this isn't the first time you've made that statement.  I figured you 
> must have gotten the fork well along by now.

Yes, but you asked me how far I'd got on the same day I posted my suggestion!
Anyway the only previous time I've ever talked about patching RG was the
simple matter of commenting out the code responsible for measuring disk space:
  https://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=8560719
It was a trivial patch to remove functionality which everyone else wants,
but which, as I said at the time, is more GUI than is good for me.
It's not much of a fork, just one little patch.

> Of course, if you're forking it anyway, you might as well share some of the
> code.  (Hint.) You really *don't* want to do a private patch anyway.

I was very careful to say the patch would be written privately, not that it
would remain private.  If -- and it is only an "if" -- I should write
such a patch, I will of course publish it here on rg-devel.

> I've been down that road myself, and it's a nightmare trying to maintain
> my own little fork of a big package.

That's not an issue for me. I maintain a patched RG which is linked against
a forked C library running under a forked kernel with several forked modules.
It's all forked if you will.

> FWIW I don't have a problem with your concept, but it sounds like a royal PITA
> to implement.  More trouble than it's worth in spades and shovels from where 
> I sit.  Go look for yourself and see if you still think this is a trivial 
> little feature massage.

I don't think it would be trivial to implement and I didn't say it would be.
I only said it would re-use a significant amount of existing code, which I
still think is true.

> Plus I don't want to see the current erase tool change. [...]
> I won't scream about it if you want to give it a different icon and 
> call it something else.

Fair enough but I would not want to add another icon to what is already quite
a crowded toolspace. What about keeping the current behaviour of the Erase tool
but making it behave in the way I suggested if you hold down Shift or Control?

> That pretty much means if you want it badly enough, send us a patch, 

No promises.

William


-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - 
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, 
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel

Reply via email to