On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 20:42 +0100, Dirk Meyer wrote:
> > I don't want put this fork of the project on a CD and require the
> > user to spend an enormous amount of time configuring several things.
> > This is where my concept of the config file turns quite drastically
> > away from the 2.0 branch's
Michael Beal wrote:
> To clarify, _YES_, I do plan on going an extremely different
> direction; one which is targeted at an American audience using a
> definitive set of supported hardware. This is something several
> respondents made point of; to wit: Freevo supports so much hardware
> that it do
The general consensus is "Go ahead and fork the project." Some responses have
been a bit negative, others quite supportive. This is fine by me.
To clarify, _YES_, I do plan on going an extremely different direction; one
which is targeted at an American audience using a definitive set of suppor
Michael Beal wrote:
> I've thought this through for quite some time. I have many reasons for
> wanting to go in a different direction. I will state that none of my
> reasons are because of anything personal against anyone on the lists.
> There are development goals I'd like to persue with the no
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 19:19 -0800, Michael Beal wrote:
> I've thought this through for quite some time. I have many reasons
> for wanting to go in a different direction. I will state that none of
I certainly can't hold against you the desire to go in a different
direction. Even I have desires t
Hi,
Michael Beal wrote:
> Some of you use SPDIF for audio playback into external equipment.
> Others use their 2-channel audio cards. Some have widescreen
> monitors while others have 4:3 screens which do not operate at
> maximum resolution. Because of these differences, there are strange
> quir
Micheal-
I have to wonder how forking will acheive your goals. It sounds more
like you want to reduce the supported hardware. What outside hardware
is required? There is nothing required by Freevo that is not required
by the MS media center. In truth there is really better support for
hardware th
On 2/6/07, Michael Beal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I've thought this through for quite some time. I have many reasons for
> wanting to go in a different direction. I will state that none of my
> reasons are because of anything personal against anyone on the lists. There
> are development goals
