The Rockbox Steering Board has been asked to look into the recent
autoresume feature and the steps that led to committing it, with a view
of possibly reverting said feature.
One objection has been that this feature was committed while several
people were disagreeing with it. In relation to these objections, people
have pointed to procedures that are supposed to regulate this sort of
No such procedure has been agreed on, although several have been proposed,
most recently in
The Rockbox Steering Board believes that the initial commit of the autoresume
feature (r28942) was problematic. Discussion was still actively going on at
the time of this commit, and we think the commit should not have been done at
that time. We urge all rockbox developers to try to take ongoing discussions
into account more actively.
For the second set of commits (r29249 and on), the situation is
different. Due to various miscommunications and other circumstances,
some people were not able to comment on the patchset that was about to
be committed. While this is unfortunate, we feel that the committer
tried hard to achieve a consensus and assumed that it had been achieved.
We therefore do not see a problem with these commits.
The autoresume feature as currently implemented works in a fully
automated way (when switched on), without manual controls (except for
configuration). We do believe that there is no technical reason why such
manual controls or other ways to interact with autoresume could not be
added later, so we do not believe that the presence of this feature in
rockbox hinders further development. We also note the lack of work in
this area by other people than the author of the current autoresume
In conclusion, the Rockbox Steering Board does not see sufficient reason to
revert the feature, neither from trunk nor from the branch for the
upcoming 3.8 release.
Received on 2011-02-27