Closed kl-productions closed 2 hours ago
@kl-productions your previous issue is #16644 and has been closed as duplicate of #6905. When an issue is closed as duplicate, it normally means that the discussion is meant to be continued in the main issue, here #6905.
Reading #6905 though, Sean from NV Access writes in https://github.com/nvaccess/nvda/issues/6905#issuecomment-1990087781:
I think a clearer issue needs to be written up. i.e. using the feature request template, and covering some of the discussion in the issue
So NV Access is expecting someone to open a new issue on this topic, using the new feature template and where a summary of the discussion in #6905 is made. When this new issue has been opened and is valided, #6905 will be closed in favor of the new one.
If the effort of writing a clear new issue is not made, there is no point opening a new issue.
For now, I'll close this issue again as duplicate of #6905 since what you have written here is not clearer as #6905 and having a second similar issue is not useful.
yes. But that issue has been inactive for seven years and the add-on didn't even exist then I'm pretty sure
Hello,
Community contributor intervention: we understand that there is a need to incorporate speech history add-on to enhance NVDA feature set and for continued compatibility. While I (Joseph) can see the benefit of this feature, please keep the following three things in mind, all of which are important for reasons described below:
I am intervening as a community contributor with the above three things for an important reason: to get us to think about complexities and effort involved when reporting software issues or suggesting features. I think Cyrille did the right thing by closing this as a duplicate (at least this is my opinion as a contributor), and I felt it would be a good opportunity to remind folks about why filling out the template is important (among other things). Therefore, I kindly advise: step back, and please try again, this time following recommendations from Sean Budd (NV Access staff), Cyrille, and I, including fillin out the template and giving details as Sean suggested while doing so. That way, speech history integration can gain more support.
Thanks.
OK so I made an issue like this but it was closed because there was a duplicate topic already which would've been fine except for the fact that it was seven years old and it didn't have a single response and that's not very much related to what I was talking about. I'm talking about making the add-ons functions built-in because I don't know a single blind person who doesn't use speech history. this would also make it so if such a vital add-on wasn't updated to support the latest version you couldn't use it. If it was built in that issue wouldn't exist anymore