On 11-07-02 05:52 PM, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
On 2011/07/02 23:47:32, J_lowe wrote:
Can't see a tracker for this, and not sure a reg test is appropriate
:) but did
one all the same..no problems.
I don't think we need a tracker for this particular patch; I think
Reinhold should push it whenever he thinks it's ready, since this isn't
going to disrupt anything else.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4628078/
I'd suggest we *do* create a tracker item, even if Reinhold pushes
immediately, so that we can work toward one source "of record" for all
changes and enhancements. As it is, there are a an unknown number of
things added or done to lilypond, leaving no trace except in git blame
or its relatives. Using the tracker, while it may seem overkill to the
senior devs, at least gives us a searchable database which can be tied,
if only manually, to Reitveld. If the outstanding request on Reitveld,
to allow searching by project, were to be implemented, life could be
different. If we had our own instance of Reitveld, we could de jure
limit it to lilypond. If wishes were fishes . . . Long one short, by
linking every Reitveld patch to a tracker item, we have an easily
searchable list of all our activities, with somewhat less likelihood of
duplicated effort and much better review of agbe and status.
Colin
--
The human race has one really effective weapon, and that is laughter.
-- Mark Twain
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
