Done. Peter
On 3 May 2015 19:32:54 CEST, "Astrid S. de Wijn" <astrid-spamme...@syonax.net> wrote: >On Sun, May 03, 2015 at 06:30:03PM +0200, Peter Bienstman wrote: >> > > > But if that is ok, because the precise algorithm is not >important for >> > > > what you want to do with this data, then there is no reason not >to fix >> > the scheduler now. >> > > >> > > I agree. >> > >> > Excellent! I look forward to the update. >> >> Oops, I misread your mail as "there is no reason to fix the scheduler >now" >> :-) >> >> Anyway, I'd be happy to tweak the scheduler, but I'd like to back it >up with >> statistical data analysis first, especially since this behavior has >been in >> place for almost 10 years, and people are used to it. > >People are also used to programs doing what it says in the >documentation. If >you aren't going to fix the scheduler, then at least mention this >difference >with SM2 in the docs. It is a pretty major deviation, and one sentence >is easy >to write. > >Or, better yet, you could create an option. > >Best regards, > >Astrid > >-- >You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >Groups "mnemosyne-proj-devel" group. >To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >an email to mnemosyne-proj-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >To post to this group, send email to >mnemosyne-proj-de...@googlegroups.com. >To view this discussion on the web visit >https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mnemosyne-proj-devel/20150503173254.GJ26143%40sliepen.org. >For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
