On Friday 19 November 2004 11:53 pm, Silvan wrote: > It's possible that I created them the first time with 1.1 and then > re-loaded and saved with the current pre-1.0 test tarball. However, the > phenomenon I just reported with bogus-surf-jam is with the test tarball.
I want to clarify that what I meant by "old file/new file" problem is in reference to the fact, which I forgot to state, that several of the organ files in question were imported and saved with various transitional versions of Rosegarden along the way. At least one of them tripped the warning about deprecated elements. Most of them didn't. Some of them are newly imported. No, I have no idea which is which off hand, and since I did most of this on Wednesday, I can't go to the backup drive and see what they used to look like either. Ugh. I'm just making an even bigger mess of it. I'm no damn good at narrowing a problem down to its root. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: InterSystems CACHE FREE OODBMS DOWNLOAD - A multidimensional database that combines robust object and relational technologies, making it a perfect match for Java, C++,COM, XML, ODBC and JDBC. www.intersystems.com/match8 _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
