On Tue, 2009-11-24 at 01:03 +0100, David Kastrup wrote: > Carl Sorensen <c_soren...@byu.edu> writes: > > IIUC, our policy is that *every* patch that is applied should result > > in a buildable LilyPond. If not, it's a bad patch. > > I don't consider this policy prudent in the particular situation "API > change implemented with little code" "Wagonloads of changes in API > users" because everything within part 1 requires an intensive review, > while the much larger part 2 can be skimmed at a much faster pace.
On the other hand, patches which break lilypond make git-bisect much less fun. Joe _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
