doing us a real favour by doing all this work. What I want to discourage
is this kind of thing - "Oh I don't like the way this works at the moment -
lets change it". On the larger and more complicated components (segment
canvas,
Ok, perhaps it was a poorly reported bug report, with a few hack
On Thursday 25 March 2004 17:33, William wrote:
> Do you mean RG is now in a strict feature freeze with absolutely no new
> features to be added -- or even discussed -- before the 1.0 release?
No, but we have a list which is pretty much "broad brush" what we're doing:
docs/task_lists/1.0_release
On Thursday 25 Mar 2004 5:33 pm, William wrote:
> Do you mean RG is now in a strict feature freeze with absolutely no
> new features to be added -- or even discussed -- before the 1.0
> release?
No.
I think Rich's objection was to the confluence of "new feature not
considered before" with "possi
Richard Bown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>Additionally (and again) we can't and shouldn't be contemplating changes of
>such a magnitude at this stage in proceedings. We really are trying to push
>towards 1.0 here and so I would urge all developers and users to think twice
>carefully about even
On Wednesday 24 March 2004 17:27, Hans Kieserman wrote:
> a) change the "sequencer exited" to be a status message at the bottom of
> the main GUI- the dialog is highly annoying when I know there isn't any
> reason for the sequencer to succeed but am too lazy to start with
> --nosequencer b) only t
Sometimes when starting with no softsynth running, autoload gets only
partway through before the sequencer exits. This causes the autoload
progress dialog to pause and lose focus *but stay on top* of the new
"Sequencer exited" dialog.
I would like to implement the following, putting it up for
