![]() ![]() In the checker options UI, if you uncheck 'just check at a static, regular interval', and leave the faster/slower values as the same when you OK, then the dialog now asks you if that is what you want ![]() Some new unit tests will make sure these errors do not happen again ![]() ![]() the clever stuff was generally confusing and failing in a variety of waysįixed a bug in the new static check time code that was stopping certain in-limbo watchers from calculating their correct next check time on program loadįixed a bug in the new static check time code that was causing too many checks in long-paused-and-now-unpaused downloaders rather than try to always keep to the same check period, even if the actual check is delayed, it just works off 'last check time + period', every time. The 'static check interval' logic is much much simpler. Sorry for any jank 'static check interval' watcher or subscription timings you saw last week! I screwed something up and it slipped through testing ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |