On Thursday 10 Feb 2005 17:40, Toni Arnold wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 8. Februar 2005 16.58 schrieb Chris Cannam:
> > The first release candidate for 1.0 is now available.
>
> Just sucessfully compiled it on a x86 gentoo box. It seems to be
> working except that duplex audio thing, which is No 1 on my wishlist.
> I sent the debug output directly to Chris.

Checking it over, it looks like the same symptom as the other two traces 
I've received.  Try the fix I committed to CVS an hour or so ago and 
let me know how it looks.

> > it will be renamed to 1.0 and released.
>
> The filename as it is for the rc1 does not fit well with the 0.9.x
> releases:
> rosegarden-4-0.9.91.tar.gz 
> rosegarden-4-1.0rc1.tar.bz2

Well, I can't claim to understand why 0.9.91 was called 0.9.91 in the 
first place.  I probably will continue to use bz2 in place of gz though 
(or else upload both, as we did for 0.9.91).  And I actively prefer 1.0 
to 1.0.0 -- is there any real practical reason why that would be a 
problem, or just a question of aesthetics?


Chris


-------------------------------------------------------
SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide
Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users.
Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now.
http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=6595&alloc_id=14396&op=click
_______________________________________________
Rosegarden-devel mailing list
[email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel

Reply via email to