I vote for keeping the "non-destructive resize" feature, mainly
because I've spent many hours making sure that copy/paste range handled
it properly. It does give the user more power in that they don't have
to use undo. And if they are several edits down from the adjustment of
the end time, undo might not be an option. Wish we had a way to survey
a representative sample of users.
And speaking of undo... I've noticed that with the destructive
resize, undo does not work. I'm guessing this is because
SegmentReconfigureCommand assumes that adjusting the end time will not
delete events, so it doesn't keep around the old segment for undo.
Therefore the events are lost forever.
From: D. Michael McIntyre <michael.mcintyre@ro...> - 2010-09-28 19:36:14
On Tuesday, September 28, 2010, Ted Felix wrote:
> I vote for keeping the "non-destructive resize" feature, mainly
> because I've spent many hours making sure that copy/paste range handled
> it properly.
I'm barely paying attention to any of this, but vote we pay close attention to
D. Michael McIntyre
Get latest updates about Open Source Projects, Conferences and News.