On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 11:18:11 +0000, Duncan wrote: > "Lionel B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted > [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Tue, 17 Oct 2006 > 09:10:07 +0000: > >>> The undo/redo would indeed be /very/ nice. However, I doubt it'll >>> make it before 1.0 at this point as it'd be a new feature, possibly >>> coming complete with implementation bugs, and we are too close to 1.0 >>> for that. Afterward, maybe. If you haven't, please check bugzy and >>> file one on this if it hasn't been requested yet, so the request isn't >>> lost. >>> If you post the number or bug URL here, I'll second it. =8^) >> >> There is a rather ancient enhancement request >> http://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=99810 from 2002, ver 0.13.0. >> Should this be re-requested for the rewrite? > > /.../ > > What' I'd suggest is wait until Charles adds a post-1.0 or pre-1.1 (or > whatever) target, then clone the old bug so it's immediately clear > what's going on and set the target appropriately.
Right, shall do. > In the meantime, you could add a comment to the old bug (therefore > effectively voting for it), suggesting that the feature be reexamined > for inclusion in 1.1. Ok, done. > If Charles still considers it bluesky, he can reply to that effect on > the old bug and/or simply mark the clone as a duplicate. Si, claro. > Do note three things: > > /.../ Points taken... I don't consider this "bug" a showstopper (or even a bug, really) and obviously appreciate too the extraordinary amount of work put in by Charles, so I am quite happy whatever course he cares to pursue. Cheers, -- Lionel B _______________________________________________ Pan-users mailing list Pan-users@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/pan-users
