On 10/11/21, 12:17 PM, "lilypond-devel on behalf of Jonas Hahnfeld via
Discussions on LilyPond development"
<lilypond-devel-bounces+carl.d.sorensen+digest=gmail....@gnu.org on behalf of
lilypond-devel@gnu.org> wrote:
Am Samstag, dem 09.10.2021 um 19:28 +0200 schrieb Jean-Charles
Malahieude:
> Hello all,
>
> In the last days of 2017, just before 2.20 was born, James arranged
> changes.tely such that items don't get just stacked one over the other
> but sort of reflect the organizing of the Notation Reference. I found it
> very wise and useful for the reader, and kept that during the
> development of 2.21.
>
> I took care of moving things around with the branching of stable/2.22
> for the English version and the other translators did their duty…
> And I've kept it in French for the moment.
>
> What do you think about having a policy about it, since most of the
> change's entries go with an update to other manuals?
As I said on GitLab, I'm in favor of keeping a more structured Changes
document already from the beginning. We probably want a more general
"Major and Breaking Changes" as the first section, though, and then a
"Notational Changes" with subsections according to the NR.
I really like the current layout of changes.tely for the development version.
It allows me to see the changes that happened in a particular version and see
if I want to update.
That being said, if the team feels it's better to keep a logical cumulative
document instead, I won't object.
Carl
