Manual publishes for 2.0 now go to:
http://mixxx.org/manual/2.0
Publishing on each commit would be nice... I'll see if I can get that
working.
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 11:21 PM, Be wrote:
> http://mixxx.org/manual/1.12/ is out of date. How can it be updated? Can
> the build server build new man
http://mixxx.org/manual/1.12/ is out of date. How can it be updated? Can
the build server build new manual HTML with each commit to the manual?
--
___
Get Mixxx, the #1 Free MP3
This Docuwiki plugin looks helpful:
https://www.dokuwiki.org/plugin:discussion
On 11/16/2015 05:22 AM, Tuukka Pasanen wrote:
> Hello,
> GIT would be best solution but probably will fail the reason you
> mentioned.. should we use pages talk-version as new stuff incubator and
> then add it to main
On 11/19/2015 08:47 PM, RJ Ryan wrote:
> Hi Be,
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Be mailto:b...@gmx.com>>
> wrote:
>
> I'm concerned about having mapping developers not be involved in the
> development workflow. How can we expect mappings to be maintained
> and keep up with new fea
Hi Be,
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Be wrote:
> I'm concerned about having mapping developers not be involved in the
> development workflow. How can we expect mappings to be maintained and keep
> up with new features in Mixxx if they aren't? Moreover, how can we expect
> them to be documente
Hi Be -- thanks for sharing your perspective,
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 5:21 PM, Be wrote:
> Grabbing mappings off the forum, with no review and often without
> consent, is how we got to the current messy state of mappings in Mixxx.
> One user saying the mapping works is a low bar.
Yes, this is
I'm concerned about having mapping developers not be involved in the
development workflow. How can we expect mappings to be maintained and
keep up with new features in Mixxx if they aren't? Moreover, how can we
expect them to be documented? There are many undocumented mappings
included in Mixxx
Hi Be / Tuukka,
Sorry for missing this discussion. This is a great topic to have guidelines
around.
I'm concerned about expecting the preset contributor to be involved in our
development workflow (Git, GitHub). This is a high bar that's going to
exclude a large portion of our user base from parti
Grabbing mappings off the forum, with no review and often without
consent, is how we got to the current messy state of mappings in Mixxx.
One user saying the mapping works is a low bar. Of course testing the
functioning of the mapping with the controller would be ideal, but
that's not an excuse
I would prefer that we not collect signatures for preset contributors. The
reasons being that it will be hard to disentangle "real copyright owners of
the Mixxx codebase" from "people whose files we are distributing with
Mixxx" if we ever need to in the future. They are very different in legal
sta
ok I posted the link to the agreement on the forum
On Thu, 2015-11-19 at 17:05 +0100, Sébastien BLAISOT wrote:
>
>
> from a phylosophical point of vue, the presets are bundled inside our
> packages/installers and the licence agremment attached to that
> package/installer doesn't make any diffe
from a phylosophical point of vue, the presets are bundled inside our
packages/installers and the licence agremment attached to that
package/installer doesn't make any difference between mapping and core
code IIRC.
So making contributors sign the agreement doesn't hurt and avoid future
questio
On 11/19/2015 07:10 AM, Owen Williams wrote:
> do we need to get this forum user to sign the contributor agreement?
> Controller stuff is always hazy for me
The main reason for that agreement is to allow us to make license
changes to the source code if needed without having to track down every
p
do we need to get this forum user to sign the contributor agreement?
Controller stuff is always hazy for me
Forwarded Message
> From: Sebastien BLAISOT
> Reply-to: mixxxdj/mixxx +000d906cb90481ea05ca72d15572950b649327d02a502a1492cf00011265a65b92a169ce0705e...@reply.github.c
Thanks a lot daniel for your test.
I will try to answer to all your points and will reorder them:
* The setup seams to be not signed: "Unbekannter Herausgeber"
Right. I will try to see if we can have it signed, but think this
involves having a mixxx-developper keypair to sign the package a
15 matches
Mail list logo
