Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

loopcontrol: prevent moving a loop beyond track end #3117

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 17, 2020
Merged

loopcontrol: prevent moving a loop beyond track end #3117

merged 1 commit into from Oct 17, 2020

Conversation

ronso0
Copy link
Member

@ronso0 ronso0 commented Sep 23, 2020

quick fix for https://bugs.launchpad.net/mixxx/+bug/1799574

bug:
we don't allow creating a loop with loop_out beyond the track end but it was possible to shift the loop there.
playback would stop unexpectedly.

@ronso0 ronso0 added the engine label Sep 23, 2020
@ronso0 ronso0 added this to In progress in 2.3 release via automation Sep 23, 2020
@ronso0 ronso0 moved this from In progress to In Review in 2.3 release Sep 23, 2020
@ronso0 ronso0 added this to the 2.3.0 milestone Sep 23, 2020
@ronso0 ronso0 requested a review from Be-ing September 23, 2020 16:10
@ronso0
Copy link
Member Author

ronso0 commented Sep 26, 2020

ping @Be-ing

@ronso0 ronso0 mentioned this pull request Sep 28, 2020
Merged
@ronso0
Copy link
Member Author

ronso0 commented Oct 1, 2020

this seems trivial, could anyone else please have a look?

@ronso0 ronso0 requested a review from daschuer October 12, 2020 18:29
Holzhaus
Holzhaus approved these changes Oct 15, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Holzhaus Holzhaus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, thank you! Should this be backported to 2.2?

@ronso0
Copy link
Member Author

ronso0 commented Oct 15, 2020

idk. have to take a look how looping works in 2.x

@ronso0
Copy link
Member Author

ronso0 commented Oct 16, 2020

LGTM, thank you! Should this be backported to 2.2?

Indeed it works the same there.
Should I ebase or open a separate 2.2 PR?

@Holzhaus
Copy link
Member

Just rebase and this will end up in 2.3 eventually.

@ronso0 ronso0 changed the base branch from 2.3 to 2.2 October 16, 2020 14:30
@ronso0
Copy link
Member Author

ronso0 commented Oct 16, 2020

ready!

@Holzhaus
Copy link
Member

Can you add a change log entry? Then we can merge.

Holzhaus
Holzhaus approved these changes Oct 16, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Holzhaus Holzhaus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM, waiting for CI.

@Holzhaus
Copy link
Member

Gosh, AppVeyor is really slow.

@Holzhaus
Copy link
Member

CI fails are unrelated.

@Holzhaus Holzhaus merged commit 9cb01c7 into mixxxdj:2.2 Oct 17, 2020
2.3 release automation moved this from In Review to Done Oct 17, 2020
@ronso0 ronso0 deleted the loop-at-track-end branch October 17, 2020 10:27
@mixxxbot mixxxbot mentioned this pull request Aug 23, 2022
Open
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Holzhaus Holzhaus Holzhaus approved these changes

@Be-ing Be-ing Awaiting requested review from Be-ing

@daschuer daschuer Awaiting requested review from daschuer

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
engine minor bug
Projects
2.3 release
  
Done
Milestone
2.3.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
2 participants
@ronso0 @Holzhaus