Re: [Wireshark-dev] Consensus needed on bug #813

2007-01-21 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 02:19:25PM +0100, Jaap Keuter wrote: > Implement the change, but make the current line a hidden item, so the > filter expressions remain valid. I know we shouldn't make hidden items > since people won't know that they can filter on them, but that is just > the point here

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Consensus needed on bug #813

2007-01-06 Thread Jaap Keuter
Hi, Implement the change, but make the current line a hidden item, so the filter expressions remain valid. I know we shouldn't make hidden items since people won't know that they can filter on them, but that is just the point here! It provides a smooth transistion. Oh, and the "Time delta from pr

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Consensus needed on bug #813

2007-01-06 Thread Michael Tuexen
What about Time since reference or first frame: 0.0 seconds ^ versus Time delta from previous packet: 0.0 seconds ^^ Just wondering... Best regards Michael On Jan 6, 2007, at 4:08 AM, Stephen Fisher wrote: > > Can

Re: [Wireshark-dev] Consensus needed on bug #813

2007-01-06 Thread Guy Harris
Stephen Fisher wrote: > Can we get a consensus on whether or not to make the change suggested in > bug #813 so we can close it out? :) I'm leaning toward making the > change, but that would mean also changing the display filter that people > are used to. His only complaint appears to be that i

[Wireshark-dev] Consensus needed on bug #813

2007-01-05 Thread Stephen Fisher
Can we get a consensus on whether or not to make the change suggested in bug #813 so we can close it out? :) I'm leaning toward making the change, but that would mean also changing the display filter that people are used to.