Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: committal of patch
Re: committal of patch
From: Thomas Martitz <thomas.martitz_at_student.htw-berlin.de>
Date: Sun, 14 Jun 2009 15:33:49 +0200
Antony Stone schrieb:
> On Sunday 14 June 2009 13:46, Al Le wrote:
>> On 14.06.2009 14:27, Thomas Martitz wrote:
>>> alex wallis schrieb:
>>>> Hi list.
>>>> I was wondering, is there any chance of getting fs #10311 commited
>>> I too think it should be committed, but as of now, it doesn't provide a
>>> setting and will beep for sighted users too.
>> But with a setting it will be considered settings bloat and will have
>> even less chances to be committed.
> Why not use the same setting as for "speech on/off"?
> If someone wants speech, they get the beeps as well; if they turn speech off,
> they don't get beeps.
> That seems to me to be a good compromise between everyone getting beeps
> whether they like it or not, nobody getting beeps even when they'd like them,
> and minimising the number of settings that the system has to store.
> Obviously this combined behaviour would have to be clearly documented so that
> people know how to get beeps if they want them, or why they get them when
> they didn't realise they'd asked for them.
That seems like a good idea to me, I was always in favor of some kind
of "Turn on accessibility features" setting :)
Received on 2009-06-14