Re: Archos Ondio Backlight MOD rockbox

2006-05-31 Thread joerch . net
you mean you bricked it ? It happened with my first Ondio as well. I've been recommended to flash it with rockbox as soon as possible. sadly, yes. But before that I had a full running bootboxrockbox. Too silly... My fault. Joerch

Re: Archos Ondio Backlight MOD rockbox

2006-05-31 Thread joerch . net
Check the wiki; it should be possible to salvage the unit with the uart boot mod. Regards, Jens Ahh, you done it! You wrote in the Wiki even if the flash content is completely garbled Maybe there is rescue for me. Joerch __

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Steve Bavin
Hmm, apologies for the many typos there. Hopefully it still makes a bit of sense. Steve Bavin

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Mike Holden
Jonathan Gordon said: and battery life shouldnt be a reason to not release for h300 (not that it really means anything to most of the ppl watching this list..) How much of an issue is battery life on the 340 anyway? I use an up-to-date daily build all the time (usually no more than a couple of

3.0 - What MUST be done?

2006-05-31 Thread Dave Chapman
Hi, I agree with the people saying that we shouldn't release 3.0 or come out of feature freeze until it's ready. But one of the problems, is that it isn't clear (at least to me), what are the outstanding tasks that MUST be done before we are happy to release 3.0. So my suggestion is that we (in

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Linus Nielsen Feltzing
Mike Holden wrote: For me, the battery life is a non-issue and I use my unit a lot. It could always be improved on of course, but it's plenty good enough to release IMHO. If this was a question of optimization, I would agree. In this case, it is a hardware issue, where some component is

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Linus Nielsen Feltzing
Malcolm Tyrrell wrote: ... The moment we come out of freeze, a whole slew of new features will go into the source, and a slew of new bugs with them. If the current code is flaky, how much more flaky will post 3.0 code be? Has the possibility of maintaining seperate release branches been

Replaygain: New beta version of unix tagger

2006-05-31 Thread john
Hi! Many thanks to Sander for posting a shell script originally made by Credits should go to iGold from the hydrogen forums. http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showuser=26599 The script is a smart and easy approach to tag mp3s with the desired replaygain tags. However, I did some

Re: 3.0 - What MUST be done?

2006-05-31 Thread Steve Bavin
To conclude, my question is simply which bugs do people think fall into the must fix category? Are there any other issues not in the patch tracker? I can't see any reports about H300 battery life and only one about the Voice UI. My selfish list (bugs which I believe I am suffering from)

Re: 3.0 - What MUST be done?

2006-05-31 Thread Sander Sweers
On Wed, 2006-05-31 at 09:47 +0100, Dave Chapman wrote: Hi, I agree with the people saying that we shouldn't release 3.0 or come out of feature freeze until it's ready. But one of the problems, is that it isn't clear (at least to me), what are the outstanding tasks that MUST be done before

H340 battery life

2006-05-31 Thread Jonathan Corbet
I thought I would toss in one quick opinion on the 3.0 release topic... I've been using the H340 port heavily since late last year. The battery life issue bugs me a bit...especially as I ponder a flight to Italy next month. I would sure like to see it fixed, and I honestly wish I had the time to

Re: 3.0 - What MUST be done?

2006-05-31 Thread Dominik Riebeling
Hi, just some side notes: On 5/31/06, Sander Sweers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A better way of organizing in my opinion for your release blocker bugs is to create a tracker bug named [TRACKER - Rockbox release 3.x] and make all the bugs/features that should be fixed for the 3.0 release

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Paul Louden
I still think it'd be fair to make H100 the only _new_ release target for the time being. I mean the 3.0 code will be compileable for H300, and we can even make a 3.0 binary available for it, but calling it a release is like a stamp of approval, and it just doesn't seem right (in my opinion, of

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Jonathan Gordon
wasnt the general consensus to keep the freeze going for a bit longer and really try to get ppl focused on the problems? and like has been said a million times already.. the battery issue shouldnt keep the h300 out of the release.. just put it as a known issue that is being looked into in the

Re: Release policy and coordination

2006-05-31 Thread Paul Louden
Most completely casual users won't even complain though. They'll try it, dislike it, and then switch back.I still very strongly feel that a known bug of that degree should not simply be a noted issue in the comments. What *strong* reson is there to include H300 in this release? The code will be