Erik Sandberg wrote:
On Tuesday 04 April 2006 20.46, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
I'd start with 4. because they're independent from the rest, and we can
readily test the rest of those.
The reason for my ordering, is that 3 can be used to verify that 4 works.
BTW, (1-3) are completely independent of (4), and I have just finished step
(1) locally. If you insist on getting (4) done before (1), then that's
perfectly OK with me; but is it OK for you to look at my patch for (1) while
I do (4)? I guess (1) is the step which requires the longest discussion, so
it might be good to start the discussion early.
If you have a working patch, let's see it.
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
LilyPond Software Design
-- Code for Music Notation
http://www.lilypond-design.com
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
