On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 02:56:28PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote: > Am Dienstag, 28. Juni 2011, 19:16:36 schrieb Graham Percival: > > Ideally so. In practice, it seems like only "experts" (or at > > least, developers and contributors) are doing anything to maintain > > it. > > So, where's the problem? Experts sharing their knowledge so that users can > easily find and use it also relieves the work load on us.
Of course "expert [users] sharing their knowledge" is great. But perhaps I should have replaced "experts" with "core developers". In 2011, there have been 3 lsr imports: 2011-05-02 f3a35eaef2b78440cdb150d36d8ff6d93e9c8d46 Neil 2011-02-28 129ef378c53f80d45f40af27ba80ad0fb5e0a53c Graham 2011-02-03 8755ca1bdfec581e21d558a5ad55da30ec4661ed Graham I'd like to be able to tell "expert users" that the easiest way for them improve the documentation is by adding snippets, and that these would be added to our docs in a timely fashion. But if we're looking at an average of 1 import every 2 months, it seems a bit dishonest to encourage LSR use [as a way to get stuff into the docs -- of course LSR can function on its own]. Also note that Neil does the most patch reviewing out of anybody (hey, what's one of the big weaknesses in our development process? oh yeah, not enough reviewing!), and I have a ton of other stuff to organize. Hence this email. I don't want to deal with LSR. I want to dump it all on Phil. I'd also like to have timely imports, which IMO means weekly (or at least 2-weekly). Anybody disagree with the previous paragraph? Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
