-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Indicator on FX channels with no route to master #1224
Comments
👍 |
👍 |
@musikBear Because when you have a channel selected, you see what channels it sends to. |
And you can select where you want each channel to send it's output. |
If @unfa or someone else is able to create an artwork for this, with the same geometry of send/receive arrows, I should be able to implement it. |
How exactly is "no output" determined? |
Yeah "no output" is a bit vague. I would guess unfa means "No route to master". -Tres |
Yeah, this is what he describes on his original Feature Request, what would be the possible amibiguity? Or is it just the PR's title that annoys you? |
👍
I have some reservations about this as the send arrows are covered by the vol knob in some instances where the "no route to master" would need to be displayed. Should we instead leverage a different part of the UI? Perhaps make the LED Spinbox an alternate color with some tooltip text? |
You're right, this is a problem, another possibility would be to change this FxLine widget's border to red-ish glow. |
@Umcaruje that's not a consistent indicator because it only shows when master is selected (or whatever it sends to). -Tres |
Yeah, from what I understand, this feature request is probably because on big projects it can get messy after you re-route mixers and add/delete a lot of instruments. @unfa probably wants better tooling to keep the project sane. |
Let's prototype that and see how many people complain. :) |
On 01/23/2015 04:01 PM, Tres Finocchiaro wrote:
That's still a bit vague... what about sends with 0 gain? Remembering Lots of small ambiguities there... |
On 01/23/2015 05:55 PM, Amadeus Folego wrote:
Ewww... maybe something less intrusive. Performance concerns are also something to consider. We can't keep |
That's the plan :-). But this feature requests needs refinement until we have a proposal that adds quality to the software and solve the usability problem that is posed. |
In the context of channel routing, it is not vague at all. |
If it does not, please send us a copy of your desktop installer |
If you reroute channel A to another channel B (disabling the send to mixer) and you delete the "submix" channel B, the channel A is left with no output. One idea was to automatically re-route such channels to master again, another is to not do that, but show a warning in the mixer so the user knows that removing channel B made channel A unable to sound.
I consider this a related issue to this one: #1219
Both could be implemented with a combobox in the preferences window to choose what LMMS should do if "orphan channels" come into existance.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: