Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

We will be releasing 1.2.0-RC2 soon. This is what needs to be done before the next release candidate: - Iron out bugs with new theme (#2892 , #2867 or we'll revert to the classic theme) - Merge rem

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

> > Sorry, isn't the multitap echo a new effect? If yes, it's missing from the > change logs Added. Thanks. - tres.finocchi...@gmail.com On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Roberto Giaconia wrote: > Sorry, isn't the multitap echo a new effect? If yes, it's missing from the > change logs > > btw

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Sorry, isn't the multitap echo a new effect? If yes, it's missing from the change logs btw, great work, everyone, the program is already pretty fine! I did a 1 hour recorded session, and it only crashed 3 times on windows. Since recovery files are working, I didn't lose anything. And I love the b

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

> > I have a pending PR since October 2 2015 for #2145 that was never merged > to master. Thanks we'll take a look https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/pull/2423. -- Site24x7 APM Insight: Get Deep Visibility into Application Perf

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Hi Tres, I have a pending PR since October 2 2015 for #2145 that was never merged to master. It is harmless and so few lines of code it can be reverted easily anytime if required. I do not know if it was forgotten or felled in a black hole. I merge it over and over in my own master branch ever

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

#2315 is closed so I've released RC1 to get some early feedback going. - We still need to branch off to a stable-1.2 very soon. - Umcaruje/softrabbit/zonkmachine/etc can you help review the outstanding PRs and decide what can go into 1.2 and what has to wait. - The release notes are he

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Most critical bugs have been fixed (I do see a few being reopened or still in progress). Are we in good shape to start the RC process? Creating an RC1 build is as simple as setting the version in CMakeLists.txt

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Quoting Tres Finocchiaro : > 1.2 isn't lost, just on hold... here's a reminder of what we have to look > forward to in 1.2 > Well, the MIDI export mentioned might need quite a bit of care and attention to be release

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Quoting Tres Finocchiaro : > Our major bugs before a release candidate are: > >- *#2318* - ControllerView causes hard crash Scratch that, just merged #2456. https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/pull/2456 -- ra...@iki.fi softrabbit on #lmms --

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Status update... We've have very minor progress since our last email, but on the bright side, #2378 (BBEditor hard crash) has been closed. (Thanks Lukas-W) Our major bugs before a release candidate are: - *#2318* - ControllerView cause

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

dk if this info can help I got a binary for win 32 at july 12. 15 *lmms-master12july15win32.exe* It is stable Unfortunate it is not version marked, but i believe it was curlydave's If at all this info can be used to anything, i will try and go back in my history and find the exact conversation -Ma

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

A status update, since it's been a couple weeks... - The master branch is *still suffering stability bugs which make it unusable for daily use.* https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Aissue+label%3Acritical+milestone%3A1.2.0 Although most people reading this email didn't

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

@Amadeus, Hi, I hope all is well. None that I am aware of were caused by you, thank you for inquiring. - tres.finocchi...@gmail.com On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Amadeus Folego wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:31:32PM -0400, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > > So 1.2's still suffering from ser

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

On Fri, Oct 16, 2015 at 02:31:32PM -0400, Tres Finocchiaro wrote: > So 1.2's still suffering from serious stability issues. > > These stability issues are causing the delay of a release candidate (e.g. > 1.2.0 > RC1) and they will continue to do so until we can fix them. > > • Some of these st

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

So 1.2's still suffering from serious stability issues. These stability issues are causing the delay of a release candidate (e.g. 1.2.0 RC1) and they will continue to do so until we can fix them. - Some of these stability issues were introduced by developers who are no longer active on the

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

> > > Looks to me like that's just the Ukrainian translation. It's the only > thing that's happened in stable-1.1 since it was merged into master in > June. Thanks! A similar commit for Aug 14th appears in master (3 d

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Quoting Tres Finocchiaro : >- Once ~38 items are decided, we need to merge forward any 1.1. bugfixes >to master that never made it in. Looks to me like that's just the Ukrainian translation. It's the only thing that's happened in stable-1.1 since it was merged into master in June. --

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

*Update:* *We need to stabilize the master branch prior to an RC1 release. Here's the most recent status:* - We have 10 (previously 24) pull requests that need to be decided if they go in prior to 1.2 or in the next release. - *The most critical of the bugs currently is #2378, which is

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

> > New right-click-menu-option on any semitone to mark all notes on this > semitone Done, thanks. * Marking Piano Roll semitones marks on all octaves (#2193) In addition, I'd like to bring some attention to some overlooked bugs... https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/issues/2023 > https://github.

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

I think there is many more features already implemented in current Master, but are those the one you suggest should not be in the RC? -Just to mention one. / *Piano-roll New right-click-menu-option on any semitone to mark all notes on this semitone/ -Or is that just one that was forgotten in this

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

@midi-pascal, please bump the bug report or PR and an admin will add it to the listing. I believe the latest Japanese translations missed the list too. Catch any more, just let us know. --

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Not to be pretentious but my contribution to enhance the Lmms translation in the code and improve the French translation does not show up in the Languages/Locale part of the Features and fixes. I know I am not a regular contributor but this has been a not-so-easy job ;-) On 15-09-13 11:46 AM,

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Tres Having spent some time today reading through our open pull requests, we appear to have a growing list, many have requests for contributors to make changes, and the are a few with unconcluded conversations. I recently listened to a blender podcast, where they spoke of a similar situation. The

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

This isn't a wish list, this is a roadmap to a stable-1.2. "Rock solid sound engine" is a sensationally sounding concept (no pun intended) but is an kind way to say performance sucks... We know this. The 1.2 branch has seen help from a fresh set of talented, busy and driven developers -- ones tha

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

As a Hardcore LMMS user I would love to see (hear) performance improvements. Sure gui is nice, sure ux is important. But having a rock solid sound engine is top priority. And I think it's time to be able to do some audio editing in LMMS. Like eg Ardour. But that's just my opinion :) Verzonden d

Re: [LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

Just my initial thoughts https://github.com/LMMS/lmms/milestones/1.2.0 Of the 29 open issues marked for 1.2 , 11 are feature feature requests, What are opinions on these being moved to 1.3? There are a lot of ux/gui issues also on the list. At present there is a lot of progress in this area. We c

[LMMS-devel] Roadmap to 1.2

There have been some rumblings of "when will 1.2 be released?" This is a valid question as our initial goal -- to have Zyn 2.5 ready for the 1.2 -- release put us behind a bit more than expected and has allowed some new features to make it in (good, bad or indifferent). The short answer is: We c