> I don't think you should release an unfinished version, right? If you can attribute the VST bug to the 1.1 release, we can hold off until it's patched, but no one did that. Here's the request for better testing results:
https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues/1049#issuecomment-53179473 If our users/testers don't followup to these basic questions, it leaves little incentive for the developers. In this case, I'm offering to look at the code that has changed once we determine which version the break occurs at. The only way this bug will be patched prior to the 1.1 release is if we broke it in the 1.1 codebase. If this existed in 1.0, we won't put priority on it for 1.1 as it's not a breaking change from stable. Does that make sense? That said, anyone can investigate this. The code is open source so anyone with a text editor can start looking at the code changes from version to version to isolate this. :+1: - tres.finocchi...@gmail.com On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 12:19 PM, bubblegummer <bubblegumm...@gmail.com> wrote: > True... :) > But I don't think you should release an unfinished version, right? > > Am 22.10.2014 18:17, schrieb Vesa: > > On 10/22/2014 06:45 PM, bubblegummer wrote: > >> ]Other 1.1 bugs that likely won't make the initial release: > >> ] > https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+milestone%3A1.1.0 > >> > >> Why not? Some of them are really annoying! > > No one is stopping you from fixing them. > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > LMMS-devel mailing list > LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list LMMS-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
