From: Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz_at_fhtw-berlin.de>
Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:44:35 +0100

Jonathan Gordon schrieb:
>
> Well, firstly the patch is a half-assed effort (no offense meant to
> kugel there). imo (obviously) it adds nothing to rockbox, it changes 1
> button in 2 screens (ignoring that its unused because plenty of people
> actually like the fact its unused) on one target (and done in such a
> way that it adds plenty of dead code to the other 27.)
>

I plan to clean it up if/when it's going in, which is not going to
happen before 3.2 anyway. And I've never heard that people like that
it's unused, I only heard that going to recording accidentally isn't so
easy (because you need a long press).
> I don't really care that rec will go to playlist viewer in the WPS.
> its not something I use much but concede that some might find that
> useful, but you have to agree that there will be plenty of people who
> would prefer it go to the eq menu (bad example of course because you
> and I know that people who do want this are probably using the eq
> wrongly), or maybe the bookmark or track info screen, or indeed any of
> the options in the WPS context menu.
>

I only need the playlist viewer. And I don't need a choice for for other
screens. Not that it matters, but the pitch- and track info screen are
already accessible with combos as of now on the e200.

> As for the insert action in the browsers, I WANT this sort of feature,
> but I fail to see why it HAS to be the "insert" option, why cant it be
> "insert shuffled" or "insert next"? My favorite option would actually
> be some sort of "repeat previous insert" which would actually be
> useful.
>

"Repeat previous insert"? What's that? I like/use insert most, so I
picked that.

> I'm sure I've said it before, and I doubt I'm alone... there is a
> difference between customizable buttons (which everyone agrees will be
> a support nightmare) and allowing the user to choose between a few
> select options for individual buttons when there is a free button to
> do it with.
>
> Jonathan
>
That reminds me of http://www.rockbox.org/tracker/task/5555, which is
rejected.
But I'd certainly not be against such a (limited) configurability. Just
the fact, that the aforementioned patch is closed stopped me from doing
this kind.
Received on 2009-03-04