"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Janek Warchoł" <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> > To: "Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> > Cc: "Urs Liska" <u...@openlilylib.org>; "David Kastrup" <d...@gnu.org>; > "Julien Rioux" <julien.ri...@gmail.com>; "LilyPond Developmet Team" > <lilypond-devel@gnu.org>; "Han-Wen Nienhuys" <hanw...@gmail.com> > Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2013 4:30 PM > Subject: Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub > >> Compare it to something like github (i'm not saying we should use >> github, that's just an example) when it takes 2 minutes and you can >> do everything in your browser (obviously, i'm speaking about small >> patches). To me, the difference is obvious. > > > Not comparing like with like. LilyDev provides a complete build > environment; GitHub doesn't.
Yup. So we are talking about creating untested patches here that eventually travel into the usual testing pipeline we use. Adding code comments and work on the documentation can actually be worthwhile with that kind of setup, and we have an actual pipeline for translations entirely separate from our issue submission system. It just shares the final lilypond-patchy-staging testing run which triggers pretty rarely nowadays, but still has provided a good safety net from breaking the code base for quite a while. Translations are a specific sort of documentation work, and other tasks might get away without a full LilyDev setup on the input end as well. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
