David Kastrup wrote Sunday, July 31, 2011 8:42 AM
Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes:
I haven't seen any interest in
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1771
My take on this (if nobody is going to protest in the next few
hours) is
to revert the flawed fix.
+1
The original bug fixer does not appear to be in the queue for
fixing the
effects of his patch, and the patch adds a considerable amount of
material.
Fixing LilyPond is rarely trivial. In my experience the
first fix one thinks of is usually flawed (and the
second ...) We need to be doubly cautious when applying
fixes from casual contributors.
Trevor
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1518/3799 - Release Date: 07/30/11
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
