David Kastrup writes: > We would still need to _track_ patches. A mailing list is just an > unorganized dumping ground.
What exactly do you mean by that, and why can't we do it like linux kernel does it? As I understand it, the submitter keeps reworking and re-posting until they get a sign-off and someone puts it in. If the submitter loses interest in the patch, is that a problem? Nothing keeps us from creating an issue in the tracker, adding a link to the mailing list with the latest patch. Of course, it would be nice if submitters got lots of positive feeback, but I fail to see how a web tool helps with that. And, of course, you being the main developer right now, if you like the current tools and procedures, that's cool [of course you saw Graham's review results and take learning and discouragement of git-cl/rietvelt etc into account]. Jan -- Jan Nieuwenhuizen <jann...@gnu.org> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel