On Wed, Dec 15, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > I really hope you just did a > label:patch > search in the issue tracker to find that liast.
Nope. Some of these are untracked. > Yes. Because the VERY FIRST gop policy debate is about how we > deal with patches. Do you realize how many questions/issues this has been your sole answer to in the past few months (if not years)? :-) > In most cases, we've already lost those patches. I'm sure you're jumping to conclusions here. Deeming these as lost is exactly what makes them "lost". > Don't cry over > spilt milk. Mmm, let me guess, this is your way of /not/ being offensive, right? :-) > I have a plan. We have the manpower. We can fix it. Aye aye. <insert epic background music here> > Look, if an old patch can still be applied cleanly to current git, > then we'll almost certainly be able to apply it to git in 3 weeks > from now. And if an old patch *doesn't* apply cleanly to current > git and nobody wants to fix it, then 3 weeks from now, it still > won't apply to git and somebody will need to fix it. I'm not planning to be around in three weeks. So, just sayin'. Cheers, Valentin. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
