James writes:
> In the CG we have nothing for patch-waiting, but just the others,
> which leads me on to:
>
> "Patch-abandoned: the author has not responded to review comments for
> a few months."
>
> Assuming that no one changes a patch-waiting for X weeks, how many
> would it take - just throwi
On 29/10/13 14:14, James wrote:
On 29/10/13 09:19, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 29/10/2013 4:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Julien Rioux writes:
On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm m
On 29/10/13 09:19, Julien Rioux wrote:
On 29/10/2013 4:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Julien Rioux writes:
On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
piece o
Ok, i said that i closed this topic, but a question was asked so just
a short answer:
2013/10/29 Julien Rioux :
> On 29/10/2013 4:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Julien Rioux writes:
>>
>>> On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
That's good, but the most irritating thing about th
On 29/10/2013 4:43 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Julien Rioux writes:
On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
piece of solid code (maybe it's not as solid as
Julien Rioux writes:
> On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
>> that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
>> piece of solid code (maybe it's not as solid as i think, but to know
>> that i need
On 27/10/2013 2:09 PM, Janek Warchoł wrote:
That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
piece of solid code (maybe it's not as solid as i think, but to know
that i need _reviews_) is laying dormant for *h
2013/10/28 David Kastrup :
>
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> Eh, nevermind. I guess i'll just let it wait and gather dust for the
>> next two months, and bring it back as a Christmas present.
>
> Your mileage may vary. You are irritated because a piece of purportedly
> solid code is laying dormant fo
Removing the translations list from the Cc list as it is not really
involved.
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/10/27 Janek Warchoł :
>> That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
>> that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
>> piece of solid code
2013/10/27 Janek Warchoł :
> That's good, but the most irritating thing about this patch is not
> that i have to solve merge conflicts. I'm mainly irritated because a
> piece of solid code (maybe it's not as solid as i think, but to know
> that i need _reviews_) is laying dormant for *half a year*
2013/10/27 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>> So, would it be possible to get issue 3239 reviewed? It's waiting for
>> half a year, and solving merge conflicts when i rebase it gets
>> irritating.
>
> I don't tell people what they are supposed to review.
Oh, really? ;-P
You can tell whet
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/10/27 David Kastrup :
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>
>>> 2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
I hereby declare the stable/2.18 branch my sole property, to be ruled
over dictatorially. As long as nobo
2013/10/27 David Kastrup :
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
>> 2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
>>> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
>>> I hereby declare the stable/2.18 branch my sole property, to be ruled
>>> over dictatorially. As long as nobody else pushes to it without my
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
>> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
>> I hereby declare the stable/2.18 branch my sole property, to be ruled
>> over dictatorially. As long as nobody else pushes to it without my
>> permission, I pledge to keep an
2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
> I hereby declare the stable/2.18 branch my sole property, to be ruled
> over dictatorially. As long as nobody else pushes to it without my
> permission, I pledge to keep and lead it to releasable state
On 13-10-26 01:51 PM, Thomas Morley wrote:
2013/10/26 Trevor Daniels :
Werner LEMBERG wrote Saturday, October 26, 2013 8:07 PM
I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
Thanks for your hard work!
Indeed! Much appreciated, David!
Trevor
Thanks a lot!!!
Harm
AO
2013/10/26 Trevor Daniels :
>
> Werner LEMBERG wrote Saturday, October 26, 2013 8:07 PM
>>
>>> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
>>
>> Thanks for your hard work!
>
> Indeed! Much appreciated, David!
>
> Trevor
Thanks a lot!!!
Harm
___
Werner LEMBERG wrote Saturday, October 26, 2013 8:07 PM
>
>> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
>
> Thanks for your hard work!
Indeed! Much appreciated, David!
Trevor
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.o
> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
Thanks for your hard work!
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
>> David Kastrup writes:
> b) translation branch
>
> The translation branch will stop getting merged with master. Some
> documentation changes from master might get cherry-picked into
> translation (I will do that myself),
2013/10/26 David Kastrup :
> David Kastrup writes:
b) translation branch
The translation branch will stop getting merged with master. Some
documentation changes from master might get cherry-picked into
translation (I will do that myself), and translation will get merged
>
David Kastrup writes:
> Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
>
>> Le 22/10/2013 20:06, David Kastrup disait :
>>
>>> b) translation branch
>>>
>>> The translation branch will stop getting merged with master. Some
>>> documentation changes from master might get cherry-picked into
>>> translation (I w
Le 26/10/2013 19:17, David Kastrup disait :
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
Since nothing has changed on "translation" since Monday (too many
other things to deal with), I just merged _locally_ "master" into
it. Would you mind me pushing this before setting the freeze?
Yes, that's fine. It
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
> Le 22/10/2013 20:06, David Kastrup disait :
>
>> b) translation branch
>>
>> The translation branch will stop getting merged with master. Some
>> documentation changes from master might get cherry-picked into
>> translation (I will do that myself), and translati
Le 22/10/2013 20:06, David Kastrup disait :
Ok, after looking at the current situation and the current patches in
review/countdown, I've decided that I'll fork off the stable release
branch 2.18 after the current batch in countdown is in master. After
that point of time, I'll only cherry-pick p
Ok, after looking at the current situation and the current patches in
review/countdown, I've decided that I'll fork off the stable release
branch 2.18 after the current batch in countdown is in master. After
that point of time, I'll only cherry-pick patches into the stable branch
after having con
26 matches
Mail list logo
