On 10/03/2012 10:36 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
We are not going to sign up bug-lilypond to receive notices automatically. Most reports will not be useful, and they will screw up the automatic tools we use to keep track of whether reports have been dealt with or not.
It doesn't have to be bug-lilypond if that's problematic. I just suggest that there be _some_ automated tracking of downstream bug reports.
We're maybe unlikely to agree on this, but I just don't see that knowing that a problem has been reported is _ever_ unuseful, even if you don't plan on following up on that report.
I also don't think that the volume is ever going to be large enough to be problematic. If it _is_, then you have a different problem -- large numbers of bug reports that are not getting where they need to.
If you think those notices are worthwhile, then *you* sign up to receive them, and send any good bug reports to bug-lilypond.
If I do this, and they _do_ prove useful, will you reconsider the option of automated tracking?
_______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
