MacArthur, Ian (SELEX GALILEO, UK) wrote: > All, > > How do people feel about my "fl_text_extents" patch (STR #2076)?
[Sorry for the late reply...] IMHO it's okay > I don't know how to get something new like that added to the API. > This change is very useful, to me, so I'd very much like to push it into > the source, but how do I get agreement for that? The "official" way is documented in the CMP: <http://www.fltk.org/cmp.php#TROUBLE_REPORT_PROCESSING> You should read about "priority 1 STRs", discussion, voting, ... > Is the proposed API acceptable? Does it suitably follow the fltk-style? Looks okay for me. However, there are some notes I'll post to the STR itself. I also opened a new discussion about the required Windows version for FLTK 1.3, as this seems appropriate now. Albrecht _______________________________________________ fltk-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk-dev
