Rockbox mail archive
Subject: Re: 3.0 - What MUST be done?
Re: 3.0 - What MUST be done?
Voice and Playback issues, at the very least.
The Playback stuff is to an extend documented here:
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/SoftwareCodecPlayback and there
are several easy to reproduce bugs relating to voice in the tracker that
should be resolved.
On 6/19/06, Keith Mosher <email@example.com> wrote:
> Now that the h300 battery issue has seemingly been solved, what else is
> standing in the way of a 3.0 release?
> On 5/31/06, Dominik Riebeling < firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > just some side notes:
> > On 5/31/06, Sander Sweers < email@example.com> wrote:
> > > A better way of organizing in my opinion for your release blocker bugs
> > > is to create a tracker bug named "[TRACKER - Rockbox release 3.x] and
> > > make all the bugs/features that should be fixed for the 3.0 release
> > > depend/block (i don't know how this works in flyspray) on it. Then
> > when
> > > the tracker bug has no more bugs depending on it you can release.
> > As far as I've seen this the actual Flyspray development release
> > (which is running on the flyspray site itself, see
> > http://flyspray.rocks.cc/bts/roadmap) has a "Roadmap" feature which
> > seems to be something like the way you proposed. I'm not sure how safe
> > it is but the upcoming release seems to be pretty near (and, to give
> > an example, the Psi project (http://psi-im.org ) also uses the
> > development version of flyspray), so upgrading may be an option (at
> > least when 0.9.9 is released).
> > > My thoughts on this are based on my experiences with other projects
> > > (Gentoo being one of them). They use a different tracker (yes
> > bugzilla)
> > > but many of the organizational issues are the same.
> > Btw, Flyspray integrates nicely with dokuwiki which is a great wiki
> > for documenting code (which, imo, is a bit awful with twiki).
> > - Dominik
Received on Tue Jun 20 03:48:02 2006
Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew