On Wed, Dec 02, 2009 at 11:25:00AM -0500, Chris Snyder wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>> Despite my agreements to both paragraphs above, I agree more with
>> the first than the second. Namely, I don't see the point of
>> keeping a list of stuff to add to the docs; that's a recipe for
>> not getti
Graham Percival wrote:
Despite my agreements to both paragraphs above, I agree more with
the first than the second. Namely, I don't see the point of
keeping a list of stuff to add to the docs; that's a recipe for
not getting anything done.
I think that can depend on a particular person's work
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 11:25:46AM -0500, Chris Snyder wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
>>> in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
>>>
Valentin Villenave wrote:
May I suggest using the existing tracker on bugs.lilynet.net?
That would be excellent. Thanks.
-Chris
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Chris Snyder wrote:
> Since I'm obviously not up to the task of attempting to fix code
> indentation, I'd like to volunteer for the task-master job, starting by
> setting up an issues tracker. My initial thought is that it would be prudent
> to set up another Googl
Graham Percival wrote:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
developer list. Those can be skimmed off into documentation, without
requi
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2009/11/27 David Kastrup :
>> I have what amounts to severe attention disorder syndrome. I can't
>> focus on easy tasks. I can only work effectively on hard or
>> impossible things, mostly until 95% are done. When learning or
>> practicing an instrument, the successful
2009/11/27 David Kastrup :
> I have what amounts to severe attention disorder syndrome. I can't
> focus on easy tasks. I can only work effectively on hard or impossible
> things, mostly until 95% are done. When learning or practicing an
> instrument, the successful way for me was to take on thin
Hi Valentin,
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Remember Rune.
I feel deeply shocked by your last sentence.
Given his prior behavior on the list(s) — how rude and completely
lacking in social filters he clearly is — I had honestly thought that
nothing else David wou
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 10:36 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Remember Rune.
I feel deeply shocked by your last sentence.
Regards,
V. Villenave.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> I have a different viewpoint. I am mystified by the desire of some
> people to mess with the most complicated parts of the program, without
> having the knowledge to pull that. It's possible to do that, but it
> requires a lot of skill in absording a lot of code quick
Graham Percival schrieb:
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Marc Hohl wrote:
Well documented code is crucial in such a project for other
developers to jump on the train, so learning by RTF code isn't
fun (as mentioned elsewhere) - for me, it's annoying, it's
frustrating, and it keeps m
Han-Wen Nienhuys schrieb:
[...]
There is not a goal per se to move stuff from C++ to Scheme, but
rather to expose relevant (C++) interfaces to Scheme so people can
write the extensions in Scheme if they want.
Come to think of it, it's actually a neat project to write a Scheme
interface to engra
Trevor Daniels schrieb:
Carl Sorensen wrote Thursday, November 26, 2009 4:31 PM
[...]
While I was learning how to use the Internals Reference
manual I wrote chapter 4 of the Learning Manual to make
it easier for others to follow. It also benefitted me:
having to write down what I was learning
Carl Sorensen schrieb:
On 11/26/09 2:56 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
[...]
Two things come to mind here:
1) When any of us asks a question on the list and gets an answer, we ought
to add it to the CG. We can either do it by writing a patch, or by writing
some text that will get added to
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
>> in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
>> developer list. Those can be skimmed off into documentation, wi
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
> in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
> developer list. Those can be skimmed off into documentation, without
> requiring all too much
Graham Percival writes:
> And I would ask new contributors to see the whole story from the
> point of view of somebody who spent years and year programming
> lilypond, explaining concepts to potential contributors only to
> have them disappear without writing any code or doc patches, and
> who ha
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> Then, I miss some general information of the future goals. Ok, the bugs
>> should be
>> eliminated, but rumor says that there are efforts to move functionality
>> from c++ to scheme.
>> Is this true?
>
> As far as I know, the goal to move fu
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Marc Hohl wrote:
> Well documented code is crucial in such a project for other
> developers to jump on the train, so learning by RTF code isn't
> fun (as mentioned elsewhere) - for me, it's annoying, it's
> frustrating, and it keeps me persistently feeling
"Trevor Daniels" writes:
> More comments would be an improvement, but I think too
> many will destroy the flow of the code when it is being
> read by more experienced developers. I would recommend
> a brief overview at the top which sets out the purpose,
> structure and method of the code. Comm
Carl Sorensen wrote Thursday, November 26, 2009 4:31 PM
On 11/26/09 2:56 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
Well documented code is crucial in such a project for other
developers
to jump
on the train, so learning by RTF code isn't fun (as mentioned
elsewhere) -
for me, it's annoying, it's frustrating
Carl Sorensen writes:
> 2) I think that it always takes developers less time to answer
> questions than to write the patch that you will produce.
I definitely disagree with "always". I am an old-school Unix wizard
myself, and there are situations when I am administering, say, an Ubuntu
system,
On 11/26/09 2:56 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
> (un)documentated code
> with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
> technical
> arguments nor the knowledge, I mostly agree with David Kastrup.
>
> A
Sorry, some Germanism found its way into the mail,
sed "s/documentated/documented/g"
;-)
Marc
Marc Hohl schrieb:
Hello all,
I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
(un)documentated code
with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
technical
argumen
Hello all,
I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
(un)documentated code
with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
technical
arguments nor the knowledge, I mostly agree with David Kastrup.
As a frog, I feel supported very well from Carl et al., but
26 matches
Mail list logo
