Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: 3.0 release announcement

Re: 3.0 release announcement

From: Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2006-05-15

The playback on H1x0 is more stable (for me) than it was pre-rebuild. I'll
admit there's a lot of cases my personal playback habits don't encompass
(for example, I don't do a lot of seeking since I tend to listen to songs
primarily).

As for playback, this page shows known bugs, and which ones are currently
considered critical.
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/SoftwareCodecPlayback

On 5/15/06, gl <gl@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
>
> OK, quick comment. Last I checked, playback still had some serious bugs.
> To release a version with the _primary feature_ broken as a landmark
> release
> is nuts imo - everybody new to the project will be turned off. I second
> the
> idea that if you need to release something it should be tagged as
> 'pre-release' / '2.9b' or similar.
>
> Another option is to temporarily revert to the previous playback engine,
> which was much more stable (on the H1x0 at least)...
> --
> gl
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Bluechip" <csbluechip@gmail.com>
> To: "Rockbox development" <rockbox-dev@cool.haxx.se>
> Sent: Monday, May 15, 2006 5:54 PM
> Subject: Re: 3.0 release announcement
>
>
> > At 12:13 15/05/2006, you wrote:
> >>On Mon, 15 May 2006 13:05:21 +0200 (CEST)
> >>Daniel Stenberg <daniel@rockbox.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Mon, 15 May 2006, Paul van der Heu wrote:
> >>[...skipped...]
> >> > bugs are fixed after 3.0 but before 3.1 hits the road.
> >> >
> >> > And all these are my personal opinions of course.
> >>I totally agree! :)
> >>
> >>--
> >
> > So v3.0 will be released with "annoying" bugs ...deliberately.
> > If the bugs cannot be fixed within 4, 8 or 16 weeks
> > ...what is to say they can be fixed be by v3.0, 3.1 or 3.2?
> >
> > I know my vote will count for absolutely nothing...
> > but I vote ...do NOT deliberately release broken firmware as a land-mark
> > version.
> > It could be quite crippling if it got slash-dotted or some other
> > publicity.
> >
> > As for people installing "annoying" "buggy" firmware - well I suppose
> > that's just their own lookout.
> > I guess that there will be a big banner on the Firmware saying "This is
> > release is known to contain annoying bugs" ...or will we keep quiet
> about
> > that and just pray nobody notices?
> >
> > BC
>
>
Received on Mon May 15 19:13:49 2006


Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa