| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0001184 | OpenMPT | User Interface | public | 2018-12-31 00:41 | 2018-12-31 17:31 |
| Reporter | klutzynervus1 | Assigned To | |||
| Priority | none | Severity | tweak | Reproducibility | always |
| Status | closed | Resolution | no change required | ||
| Platform | x64 | OS | Windows | OS Version | 10 |
| Product Version | OpenMPT 1.28.01.00 / libopenmpt 0.4.0 (upgrade first) | ||||
| Summary | 0001184: 31-255 bpm? | ||||
| Description | Hey i would like to talk about what is going on with the tempo. it is 32-255 but no 31 bpm? can you fix it in .it only? I saw the 31 bpm in the original impulse tracker only. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
| Has the bug occurred in previous versions? | |||||
| Tested code revision (in case you know it) | |||||
 |
This is pretty much the opposite of the XM case: Just because it's technically possible doesn't mean that it makes sense to take the effort to implement it. |
|
|
Also, please stop setting the urgency of your "bug reports" to "immediate". Nothing about them is so important that it requires to be fixed immediately. |
|
|
Also. STOP. POSTING. REQUESTS. IN. RANDOM. PLACES. The more than three year old and completely unrelated OpenMPT 1.25 news item is almost as bad a place to ask about a change to be made in OpenMPT as my personal website. Why do you keep doing this? We will not think "oh this person sent a bug report in several places, it must be really important and I will start working on it instantly!" when you do this. I will, in fact, do the exact opposite if you think that you have to grab my attention like this. |
