On Thu, Aug 11, 2011 at 04:59:02AM +0000, Keith OHara wrote: > Graham Percival <graham <at> percival-music.ca> writes: > > > Type-critical: > > > You might want to split this into two: > regressions to the output of Lilypond, and > critical impediments to development
Why bother splitting it? I forsee an average weekly count of 2 Critical regressions, and 0.15 critical impediments to development. I really hope that both "sub-types" would be fixed very quickly, and both will block a stable release. Given that every other type is likely to have between 20 and 400 issues, I don't think that it's worth splitting them. > > * Type-ignorance: (fixme name?) it is not clear what the > > correct output should look like. > > In a classification of Types, I'd drop this. It is not a type > of problem but rather a status of problem, and not something we > will likely want to sort under. We can look in the comments to > see if the desired behavior is clear before starting to program. I'm fine with that. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
