Hello, On 9 January 2012 13:04, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 09, 2012 at 01:24:42PM +0100, m...@apollinemike.com wrote: >> On Jan 9, 2012, at 1:20 PM, James wrote: >> >> > Not sure if this is a 'critical', as while it is a regression, it is >> > the same in current stable as it is in current dev (i.e. it was 'ok' >> > in 2.12 but never was, it seems in 2.14). >> >> My vote is for making it critical - I think a regression from >> any stable version is a critical regression. I don't think it's >> worth making a 2.14.X that includes a fix, but the regression >> should block 2.16. > > Umm, why don't we just follow the policy?
Quite > A critical regression > is anything that broken in the previous two major stable versions. > We are now working on 2.15, so any regression relative to 2.14 or > 2.12 is critical. Regressions from 2.10 are not critical. That was my mistake, I was sure it was one major stable. regards -- -- James _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
