Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 06:44:51PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Graham, you wrote Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:48 PM > > >Completely agreed! I've taken a stab at this with the "stamp of > >approval" concept of a release -- please take a look at the > >updated GOP-PROP 8...(probable decision)

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-10 Thread Trevor Daniels
Graham, you wrote Wednesday, August 10, 2011 5:48 PM On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: Don't get me wrong. Whether we place these issues in a critical category or not is hardly a vital decision, but here we're talking about deciding Policy. Policy decisions mu

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Wed, Aug 10, 2011 at 10:32:01AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Graham Percival wrote Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:09 AM > > >Using lily-git.tcl and being able to fix it are completely > >different things. IIRC the only people who have worked on > >lily-git.tcl are the original author of it,

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-10 Thread Trevor Daniels
Graham Percival wrote Wednesday, August 10, 2011 9:09 AM On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:27:07AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: Wouldn't work. Few, if any, developers use lily-git.tcl so are unlikely to be in a position to fix it. Using lily-git.tcl and being able to fix it are completely differ

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-10 Thread Graham Percival
On Tue, Aug 09, 2011 at 09:27:07AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Jan Warchoł wrote Tuesday, August 09, 2011 12:27 AM > >Because having some issue officially block stable release is the > >only > >way of seriously pushing developers to fix it? > > Wouldn't work. Few, if any, developers use lil

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-09 Thread Trevor Daniels
Jan Warchoł wrote Tuesday, August 09, 2011 12:27 AM 2011/8/8 Trevor Daniels : Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 08, 2011 6:06 AM Type-critical: * anything which stops contributors from helping out (e.g. lily-git.tcl not working, source tree(s) not being available). To limit this scope of

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-08 Thread Jan Warchoł
2011/8/8 Trevor Daniels : > > Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 08, 2011 6:06 AM >> Type-critical: >>   * anything which stops contributors from helping out (e.g. >>     lily-git.tcl not working, source tree(s) not being >>     available). To limit this scope of this point, we will >>     assume

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-08 Thread Graham Percival
On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 10:50:02PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 08, 2011 6:06 AM > > > * anything which stops contributors from helping out (e.g. > > lily-git.tcl not working, source tree(s) not being > > available). To limit this scope of this p

Re: GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-08 Thread Trevor Daniels
Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 08, 2011 6:06 AM ** Proposal summary Let’s get rid of priorities. We will simply describe bugs in neutral terms; each contributor can search and interpret the results as he or she sees fit. This is a better approach than haggling over priority. We will

GOP-PROP 8: issue priorities (radical update)

2011-08-07 Thread Graham Percival
Thanks for the discussion so far! Based on that, I have a radically different proposal. http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_8.html ** Proposal summary Let’s get rid of priorities. We will simply describe bugs in neutral terms; each contributor can search and interpret the results as he or she s