On 19 January 2012 20:17, Tobias Doerffel <[email protected]> wrote:

> Yeah, you're right, it indeed differs.. Looks like
> http://lmms.git.sourceforge.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lmms/lmms;a=commit;h=56d7e2e6ecb9eefeef34c29679d53a2620e6286c
> is causing this. However as this is an upstream fix, I'm not sure
> which behaviour is correct, i.e. whether to revert this change in LMMS
> or not.. any opinions on this?


It's ... a tricky one. I expect my instruments not to change out from
underneath me in a minor point upgrade.

OTOH, when could you ever then upgrade to upstream?

The problem is that instruments are instruments, and a bug to the
developer is a quirk to someone who's come to rely on the bug.

Suggestion: that sort of change should really be a major number
upgrade, say 0.4 to 0.5.


- d.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
LMMS-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel

Reply via email to