Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Recent icon addition
Re: Recent icon addition
From: Jonathan Gordon <jdgordy_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 16:13:21 +1000
On 7 May 2010 15:59, Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> Is it really necessary to have an icon to tell whether a menu function can
> be assigned to a hotkey?
> We don't have one for if they can be assigned to a quickscreen, and it's
> fairly easy to be able to check if an option can be assigned to a hotkey
> very quickly. Not to mention if someone changes the hotkey often, they will
> likely remember which functions they use it on.
If they change it often there is a good chance the icon will help then alot!
> It seems simply additional bloat for a feature that's very unnecessary,
> especially given the significant binsize increase from the patch.
read the logs, Blue_Dude said he'd figure out the delta after sleeping
> Not to mention there's no added manual description for what these new
> visuals mean, so it's completely useless to the user anyway except to figure
> it out by trial and error.
So go write it?
> The patch didn't even exist on the tracker for longer than a day before
> committing, and the author noted in IRC shortly after the commit that it
> seemed to have something wrong (the huge RAM usage increase) and left it in
> Rockbox, going to sleep rather than staying to fix it, or reverting it to
> come back later. Is there some reason it couldn't have been removed when it
> immediately didn't cause the expected result? It just seems to me that a
> patch that is definitely not working quite right shouldn't just be left
> applied for later when you know immediately something is wrong.
Received on 2010-05-07