On Sunday 05 October 2003 5:54 pm, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Sunday 05 October 2003 15:09, Chris Cannam wrote: > > Just so long as it doesn't break everything just in time for the > > expo. > > Ditto. > > Let's not waste too much time on this.
Well, as I said to Chris, seeing as this is the thing I want to do right now (and I haven't done anything on RG in a while) I think you get what you pay for. > The debug output issue could > have been solved by building with --disable-debug and redirecting > what was left to /dev/null Ok, but that's not really the point. This will have had to be done at some anyway. > The doc switching is not essential and can wait IMHO. Optimisation > can (I'm tempted to say 'must') wait even more, way past 1.0. Right > now we're very very close to having something releaseable. Not > 1.0pre-material, but we've almost got back to the functionality level > we had prior to switching to mmap scheme. May I suggest we focus on > this ? Point taken but there are more than a few loose ends to tidy up before release and that was the most immediate thing that jumped on me prior to the demo. I hate that wait and if there's something simple we can do (remember the Rosegarden::Event optimisation we found just after 0.9.1) to improve it then I want to find it - even if it's commenting out features (or making them switcheable) to improve the perception. I'm in salesman mode remember and coming back to RG that's the first biggest hiccup. And this doesn't really fall down to being a KDE issue or something, RG is about as quick to startup as any large Windows app, the inefficiency's are purely down to us doing too much (or doing too much infficiently). R ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
