<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 10:17 AM, Mitchell Gore <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:mitchell.gore@gmail.com">mitchell.gore@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 12:14 PM, Gary Buhrmaster <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com" target="_blank">gary.buhrmaster@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 09:08, Mitchell Gore <<a href="mailto:mitchell.gore@gmail.com" target="_blank">mitchell.gore@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
....<br>
<div>> With the Prime it appears to be different. It uses Channum for tuning. Is<br>
> this intended or is it part of the issues with the Prime on .24? Is this<br>
> different in master/.25?<br>
<br>
</div>That was an inconsistency (well, it was a bug) that I recall<br>
someone posted as being corrected in master some number<br>
of months ago (I do not remember exactly when).<br>
_______________________________________________<br></blockquote></div><br></div>It def. seems like a bug to me. Any way this can be pushed to FIXES?<br>
<br><br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Not easily, the whole recorder code has been refactored in master. I personally would not backport it, especially given our near-term plans to release .25.</div><div><br></div><div>
Robert </div></div><br>