2011/6/30 Graham Percival :
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:34:56PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Graham Percival
>> wrote:
>> > Daily tests would be awesome:
>> > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=933
>>
>> We used to have this, but it was rathe
2011/6/30 Han-Wen Nienhuys :
> Overall, I think this cycle took too long.
As i'm pretty new here, i cannot compare this cycle to previous ones,
but i think i agree :)
2011/6/30 m...@apollinemike.com :
> On Jun 30, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> We should strive to have policies that
2011/6/30 Graham Percival
>
> > >Oh, and thank you, Graham, for putting so much effort into
> > >organizing
> > >Lilypond development. One of the lessons learned IMO, though you
> > >may
> > >not like it, is that active leaders are necessary to push along a
> > >project of this size.
Agreed.
>
On 11-06-30 10:53 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
By "our limitation", I'm referring to the lifetime of a patch.
- patch gets written
- patch is put on Rietveld.
- ** James does the regtest comparison with his shiny new 4-core
8gb-ram machine
- if no regtest errors, patch is tagged with patch-revie
On Fri, Jul 1, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> There is no doubt in my mind that such a safety net would save us
> developer time and frustration. Such a script could be easily
> dumped into a cronjob; if all is well, it is silent; if any of
> those commands fails, it emails a warning t
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 11:26:04AM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > Catching compilation (make and make doc) errors, and telling us
> > exactly which commits occurred between the last successful build
> > and the current failing attempt
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 1:04 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
>> We used to have this, but it was rather fragile, so it only caught
>> compilation errors, and no regtest breakage.
>
> Catching compilation (make and make doc) errors, and telling us
> exactly which commits occurred between the last succes
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 01:09:57PM +0100, Graham Percival wrote:
> A challenge for somebody else (because Carl has done enough):
> produce 1 or 2 graphs that visualize this. Note that producing a
> good graph is not just a matter of picking two columns and
> clicking through a wizard in excel; I'd
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 07:33:42PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I've done an analysis
...
> P.S. I've attached a csv file of my analysis; I've got a .xls file if
> anybody is interested.
Wow. You've earned yourself another Graham Kiss (tm). That's
incredible. This is precisely what I was hopin
On 6/30/11 9:21 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:17:36AM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
>> We should examine other reasons for the delay of the 1st candidate
>> appearing, and the delay between the 1st and last release candidate,
>> and figure out if there is a way to prev
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 05:33:08PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "Graham Percival"
>
> To:
>
> >Cool project, but I don't think our limitation is processing
> >power. My desktop is idle at least 95% of the time, so I could
> >dedicate a lot more horsepower to GU
- Original Message -
From: "Graham Percival"
To:
On a tangent: at Google I am working on a side-project that
essentially is distcc on steroids; it will allow any compilation
...
It could speed up GUB and regtest checking for those that have access
to several machines.
Cool project
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:34:56PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > Daily tests would be awesome:
> > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=933
>
> We used to have this, but it was rather fragile, so it only caught
> comp
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 11:17:36AM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
> >
> > What went well, what went badly? This is a discussion only; it
> > will be summarized, and we will refer back to it i
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 12:21 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
>> On a tangent: at Google I am working on a side-project that
>> essentially is distcc on steroids; it will allow any compilation
> ...
>> It could speed up GUB and regtest checking for those that have access
>> to several machines.
>
> Coo
On Jun 30, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
>> http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
>>
>> ** Proposal summary
>>
>> What went well, what went badly? This is a discussion only; it
>> will be summarized, and we will refer
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
>
> ** Proposal summary
>
> What went well, what went badly? This is a discussion only; it
> will be summarized, and we will refer back to it in future policy
> decisions, but no new policies will
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 09:00:48AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Michael Welsh Duggan wrote Thursday, June 30, 2011 5:34 AM
>
> >Graham Percival writes:
> >
> >>http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
> >
> >Could I please ask, for my sanity, that we use ISO 8601 dates?
Sorry, and done.
Michael Welsh Duggan wrote Thursday, June 30, 2011 5:34 AM
Graham Percival writes:
http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
Could I please ask, for my sanity, that we use ISO 8601 dates?
+1 (and thanks for reworking the list)
Oh, and thank you, Graham, for putting so much effort into
Graham Percival writes:
> http://lilypond.org/~graham/gop/gop_4.html
[...]
Could I please ask, for my sanity, that we use ISO 8601 dates? Living
and working in the USA, I always get mentally confused between
DD-MM- and MM-DD- (either way). To help out, I will convert the
dates in your
20 matches
Mail list logo
