On Sun, Jul 03, 2011 at 10:20:41AM +0000, James Lowe wrote: > ________________________________________ > From: lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore....@gnu.org > [lilypond-devel-bounces+james.lowe=datacore....@gnu.org] on behalf of Colin > Campbell [c...@shaw.ca] > > 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. > > 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.
By decree, we will seriously discuss this proposal at a later date as part of GOP. Until we have a full discussion of the proposal, we will not adopt any change of existing policy. > 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. I don't think this is a horrible thing -- the git changelog is a perfectly reliable source of information. It's searchable in the webgit interface, or browsable within gitk, etc. The open-source community has a long history of looking at cvs/svn/mercurial/git changelogs. > Yes I agree* James, do you really think that it would have been worth adding a google tracker issue for 12503a0c383617cd11fa0bba2836af6c0518ecf7 ? I think that some sort of balance is called for; some patches definitely need the extra administation of having an issue number, most would benefit from it, but some patches can be pushed immediately with no fuss. Don't get me wrong; it's great that you and Colin are adding issue numbers, and I certainly don't want to discourage you! And of course it's good if patch-writers let us know if this is fixing an existing issue. I just think that: 1. we shouldn't institute a blanket policy of "always issue numbers" until we've discussed it properly. 2. when that discussion occurs, I will be arguing against such a policy; instead, I will suggest that we have a "always issue numbers by default, unless it's not important enough to bother with one" policy. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
