2016-06-09 20:52 GMT+02:00 Timofonic :
> I'm just a bad user but...
>
> Why isn't Legacy canvas ditched in the development branch and focus efforts
> in the GAL one exclusively?
I think you follow the list enough to know why this is. :)
> What about OpenGL and slow in certain platforms? What Ope
Legacy isn't ditched yet because it's not ready to be ditched yet. You're
welcome to help contribute to all the work that needs to be done before that
can happen.
Don't know about the Windows graphics stuff, but I'm sure the people who do
have considered this.
You'd rather we wait a long time and
f
Timofonic [timofo...@gmail.com]
Sent: 09 June 2016 19:52
To: kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] [PATCH] Legacy: delete and force middle button
pan for GAL consistency
I'm just a bad user but...
Why isn't Legacy canvas ditched in the development branc
I'm just a bad user but...
Why isn't Legacy canvas ditched in the development branch and focus efforts in
the GAL one exclusively?
What about OpenGL and slow in certain platforms? What OpenGL version is KiCad
using currently? I fail to see it. Damn, even MESA is getting OpenGL 4.3+ too.
Can
I am looking forward to "better" things :)
2016-06-07 17:12 GMT+02:00 Chris Pavlina :
> Heh :)
>
> I'm working on the replacement feature. There is definitely a strong argument
> in favor of writing the replacement before removing the original, so I'm going
> to do that. Could be a couple days, I
Heh :)
I'm working on the replacement feature. There is definitely a strong argument
in favor of writing the replacement before removing the original, so I'm going
to do that. Could be a couple days, I have to spread it out with Real Work now.
I promise it'll be better than what we had :)
On Tue,
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 10:20:56AM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> Also, I really feel like I should point out - it's not feasible to gather user
> input for _every change_. That's how we got to the point we're at, really -
> lots of "this would be useful for _me_", so it gets thrown in, and then we
Also, I really feel like I should point out - it's not feasible to gather user
input for _every change_. That's how we got to the point we're at, really -
lots of "this would be useful for _me_", so it gets thrown in, and then we have
a hodgepodge of incoherent "features" each used by one person to
Sure, but I did propose a replacement for it, and even volunteered to implement
it. Any opinions on my proposed replacement?
Perhaps I'll implement the replacement *first*, that should keep people happy.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 08:56:35AM -0500, Moses McKnight wrote:
> I'm not sure removing featu
I'm not sure removing features like this is wise without at least asking the
/users/ (not just developers) first - and give them a little time to notice and
respond as well. I personally use nothing but middle button pan, but I know
what it is like to be quite used to a feature and then the nex
Yeah, this is the last call for disagreement, I'm going to push this tomorrow
if nobody speaks up.
On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 03:23:45PM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> I, for one, support the patch. I see it is not a hot topic with an
> endless discussion, so perhaps it is safe to commit. I hope thi
I, for one, support the patch. I see it is not a hot topic with an
endless discussion, so perhaps it is safe to commit. I hope this message
is a gentle reminder to people who would vote against, if there are any.
Regards,
Orson
On 06/04/2016 09:30 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> This is one of the leg
This is one of the legacy/GAL consistency bits that we discussed a while ago.
Legacy allows middle button pan to be disabled in favor of a middle button
zoom. GAL doesn't. This patch removes "Use middle button to pan" (forcing it
True for existing configs), and removes "Limit panning to scroll size
13 matches
Mail list logo
