This results in the item going down, compared to doing the opposite dragging action upwards.
This is confusing even for an experienced user like myself and should be corrected. Took me a good five minutes to understand what was happening.
Personally I prefer the dragging to be more consistent with EasyWorship (drag inbetween other items), instead of dragging down on the item itself; since thatās what the buttons on the left-side are for IMO.
Yeah, thatās definitely a bug. The grey line should denote where the item ends up, rather than be an indicator of if itāll be moved. So I think in this case the behaviour of the first case is correct, but the second case is not. Does that line up with what youād expect, too? Want to make sure Iām not confusing the issue further!
The first case is correct, yeah; grey-line breaks in-between items and shows where you want something to go.
So the bottom grey-line behaviour is all that needs correcting, at least from a user-perspective. If weāre both understanding each other correctly
This last part does my head in, in terms of explaining, and just complicates discussion, but here it is anyway: - Either indicators will show when dragging an item whatsoever (but will do nothing), unless you āsplitā between another item in the schedule.
Awesome, weāre on the same page then. Let me see if I can get time to take a look at that over the next week or so. Feel free to poke and remind me if not!
Thereās no grand plan, itās just me developing at the moment and time constraints are an issue. But Iām certainly hoping there will be more developments and more releases - just likely at a slower pace than things have been in the past.
To be honest what I am reading from this is there is no game-plan or vision.
If thatās the case why donāt we pair up! At the very least we can have a chat and see what we could potentially do. Maybe improve a few things here and there.
I donāt know if you have been following the forum and saw my release, but itās all there working and tested. I use it at the every week.
I forgot the exact number, but between 90% to 95% of the upstream source code lines are yours. So evidently peopleās contribution hasnāt been too deep when it comes ot the source core.
With my fork I have overwritten and added/touched about 36%.
If numbers are anything to go by, this should tell you my level of dedication.
Furthermore, users have been jumping ship for the last 2 years, so it would be a nice to resuscitate the project with some updates, right!
At the very least, you donāt loose anything.
Think about it.
I think if you have the passion, time, energy, desire and skill to take what exists today and craft it into something new then you shouldnāt wait around for someone to give you permission - provided of course itās within the bounds of the licence/copyright etc.
Thatās the beauty of open source and thatās why itās given to the world on that basis. I remember seeing the project at the beginning and I still see it in use every Sunday which is fantastic.
And if the code goes on to power or inspire something else then thatās fantastic too.
I think what Mike is trying to indicate that the future of the project is quite simple - slow and steady releases as his time permits. If thatās all he has the capacity for then we have to respect that, whatever our personal view may be. Managing large - or large numbers of - commits really isnāt where itās at right now.
So yes the official version is probably not going to evolve so much in the near term. Which to be honest is fine by me and the users I work with. For sure I wish I had more time too to dive in and fix some of the bugs and rough edges but thatās not my life/career stage either. The day job is quite enough!
Iām not really sure I see the relevance of my work. But a grand total of not much, unless you count moral support over the years I guess?
I was just trying to encourage you in your endeavours to make it it better and take it in whatever creative direction you can imagine, whilst also offering my supportive view on where I think the āofficialā project is headed.
The project is headed to oblivion, that much is evident from the last 2+ years. It will keep bleeding user-base due to lack of support and bugfixes for one; likewise the lack of new features.
ā [I asked ChatGPT how to sound a bit nicer and it said āThe project seems to be heading toward stagnationā. I am putting this here, so youāall know I am aware of your feelings. Letās not (mis)interpret energy/passion for being confrontational, ok?] ā
Just in the last month, suddenly canāt even build normally because a dependency snapshot can no longer be downloaded it seems! This is another small repo, an implementation of the planning centre interface by @berry120.
Before it wasnāt a build issue, now it is! What I assume is happening here, is perhaps some supporting dependency server/repo has expired or something of the sort. Point being, things like that will keep happening and already are. If there is no user-base there is no incentive to develop externally and even internally.
What can be done? A plan ā¦
A plan/vision is formed by @berry120 with the community( even if just a little ). At least so we can look forward to something. Itās about @berry120 saying:
ā I plan to do this/that, on a so and so basis. I wonāt stick strictly to it, but it will be on best effort. Here are some general ideas ā¦. ā - great!
Or it could be - āI am no longer planning to actively maintain this. I will appoint someone who will maintain the project and occasionally oversee it!ā - thatās also cool!
Or just - āEveryone jump ship, this is no longer my priority. The project will not be actively maintained! I am not handing it over for support to anyone else. ā - fair enough man, we move on with life!
So here I am asking a very clear question especially to @berry120 but also the community.
I am handing over ~40 features in about 700 commits on a silver platter, do you or anyone want to make any use of any of them?
We can have a call or exchange emails, or have a public discussion. Other users could join and we could revitalise the project. For example, I could do the integration and @berry120 can just oversee it if he wants; options - there are many. We could work together and do something with it.
I donāt care if none of my work is integrated, though I think it would be shame if users canāt benefit from it! What I am mostly advocating for, is a clear communication of intention from @berry120 to which I or anyone else can get on board with.
YES or NO is fine by me!
I want everyone to know, I dislike being the bearer of bad news and also seeing all of @berry120ās previous work and effort become obsolete; and along with the ultimate benefit of the users are the ONLY reasons I am bringing this to everyoneās attention again!
I want to know from @berry120, do you at least want to try to work together on this? We can at least see if you are interested in any or what I have done or maybe what we could do with it; other users might offer code or ideas; and we do a release for some time next year.
Personally, I got what I wanted from this project and my expansion pack which I actively and regularly use works nicely for me! I now have the experience and some amazing ideas along with the confidence to make a whole new presentation app should there ever be an incentive to do so!
God bless you all and looking forward to @berry120ās reply!
The intentions for the project were already made clear here in this thread and elsewhere. There project will remain in line with what Mike himself has to maintain and manage, which he freely admits is not much right now. There is your answer.
It remains available for anyone who wants to download and use it, with no implied warranty (never was one) and all the limitations therein.
Iām sure if there was a critical bug which stopped it being useable altogether it would get fixed. Heck I might even do it myself if it came to it as I have a vested interest with 3 congregations all using it.
I think āheaded for oblivionā is a bit over the top. The download remains available. The code is there forever more to be downloaded, experimented with, forked, adapted etc., and itās not going anywhere. Hopefully it will bless other people for years to come, but everything has a lifetime and maybe some people will start to migrate. Itās still here for those that want it (and Iāve seen people still on 2020.0 )
Once again, I really do encourage you - as others have before - to go ahead and support your extended fork if you think it can go on and bless others. Or even if it achieves that through your own use thatās awesome too.
Usually this would mean I could say itās also fixed in the CI build, but unfortunately thereās a separate issue with that at the moment that I need to open a support case to fix (long story, but the long and short of it is I hope itāll be fixed in the CI release for you to try / verify sometime next week.)
To try to address some of the other discussion going on here, and hopefully put it to bedā¦
I think Mr. Walrus here put it best:
the future of the project is quite simple - slow and steady releases as his time permits.
The project is by no means abandoned or heading for oblivion, but updates are likely to be slower than they have been in the past. The latest statistics I have show that usage has dropped off slightly in the last couple of years (maybe 10% or so) but thereās still many active users regularly using it across the globe. If more of those users jump ship because another package fits their needs better, then fantastic - and more power to them, Iām glad Quelea was able to fulfil their needs for a period of time!
The same goes for your fork - I think itās fantastic that youāve taken Quelea and modified it to better suit your needs, and the needs of some others too. This is the beauty of open source - Iāve never stopped you advertising it on this forum, and I encourage you to continue with its development! Regularly reviewing and testing new code however before accepting it can take up just as much time, and this is especially the case with new features, where weād need to discuss and agree on if we wanted that feature, the design of it, etc. before even getting to the code review part. Itās simply time that I canāt commit to giving at this point, and thatās why Iāve been unable to accept any offers of collaboration.
I donāt want to get dragged into a long discussion, so I intend for this to be my final take on the subject. Hopefully the above is clear, but to summarise, and hopefully put it unambiguously:
Quelea has far lower activity than it did, but itās not abandoned, nor is there a plan to abandon it. If I do ever make a conscious decision to abandon development, Iāll announce that clearly.
Iām not interested in anyone else coming in to ārevitaliseā Quelea with significant extra code / commits, as Iād want to review this code thoroughly first and likely enter into design discussions on significant changes or additions - and I simply donāt have the time for this.
Simpler contributions, such as simple bugfixes or (of course!) new or updated translations all continue to be very welcome, and Iāll review and include those as and when I have the time.
Please do flag any genuine issues, and Iāll address them when I have time.
I welcome and encourage anyone to fork Quelea, and redistribute it, if they have any new significant features or changes they want to add. The license permits it, Iām all for it, and anyone is welcome to promote their fork on the forums (though Iāll reserve the right to say āwithin reasonā here - no spamming every post please!)
Thereās a few changes since the last release has gone out - nothing major, but the (very rough!) plan at the moment is maybe to add a couple more minor things, then rollout a 2026.0 release at the beginning of next year. Again, Iām not promising though - weāll see what happens!
I canāt run the latest CI release, says Java Runtime Environment 25.0 is required, even when I installed the latest Bellsoft JDK 25 that includes JavaFX.
I am putting this here, so youāall know I am aware of your feelings. Letās not (mis)interpret energy/passion for being confrontational, ok?] ā