Dominik Riebeling wrote:
>
>> I don't say binsize isn't a valid reason. But it's kinda stressed very much
>>
>
> Maybe it's stressed much lately. But as already has been said, Rockbox
> is much more "feature complete" than it was like two years ago, and we
> need to decide how much bells and whistles we really want and what
> (and especially how much space) we're willing to sacrifice for this. I
> haven't seen much of a discussion about this here though.
>
Just a small followup on this point: Rockbox is also bigger than it's
ever been. I think it should be obvious that binsize will become more
and more of a concern, the larger Rockbox grows.
Received on 2008-10-29