On Mon, 30 Apr 2012 17:26:29 +0200
David Kastrup wrote:
> Well, we've expected the next stable for months now. If the
> expectation does not turn out true, it might make sense to get a
> _timely_ report about just was the problem with 2.14. I am not
> particularly fond of the message that putti
Martin Tarenskeen writes:
> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
> 'Any chance 'that the forthcoming' Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in
> Fedora 17'
Fedora 17 packages Lilypond 2.15.29 currently.
>>
>>> That sounds
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, David Kastrup wrote:
'Any chance 'that the forthcoming' Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in
Fedora 17'
Fedora 17 packages Lilypond 2.15.29 currently.
That sounds like imprudent policy. Packaging an unstable version shou
On Mon, 30 Apr 2012, David Kastrup wrote:
'Any chance 'that the forthcoming' Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in
Fedora 17'
Fedora 17 packages Lilypond 2.15.29 currently.
That sounds like imprudent policy. Packaging an unstable version should
only be done by somebody committed to tracking
Pavel Roskin writes:
> Quoting James :
>
>> 'Any chance 'that the forthcoming' Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in
>> Fedora 17'
>
> Fedora 17 packages Lilypond 2.15.29 currently. In my understanding,
> it means that the maintainer believes that a new stable version of
> Lilypond will be released
Quoting James :
'Any chance 'that the forthcoming' Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in
Fedora 17'
Fedora 17 packages Lilypond 2.15.29 currently. In my understanding,
it means that the maintainer believes that a new stable version of
Lilypond will be released before or shortly after Fedora
Hello,
On 30 April 2012 10:16, Francisco Vila wrote:
> 2012/4/30 James :
>> Martin,
>>
>> On 29 April 2012 17:28, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
>>
>> You need to talk to the/a Fedora Maintainer to get them to package it.
>
>
2012/4/30 James :
> Martin,
>
> On 29 April 2012 17:28, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
>
> You need to talk to the/a Fedora Maintainer to get them to package it.
No Fedora maintainer can package LilyPond 2.16 if it has not been
re
On Sun, 29 Apr 2012, James wrote:
Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
You need to talk to the/a Fedora Maintainer to get them to package it.
No one as far as I know who contributes to the LP project does this
actively.
I'm not that technically savvy on this topic, but
Martin,
On 29 April 2012 17:28, Martin Tarenskeen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
You need to talk to the/a Fedora Maintainer to get them to package it.
No one as far as I know who contributes to the LP project does this
actively.
I'm not that technic
Martin Tarenskeen writes:
> Hi,
>
> Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
First it needs to get accepted in LilyPond.
--
David Kastrup
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/li
Hi,
Any chance Lilypond 2.16 will be accepted in Fedora 17 ?
--
MT
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
12 matches
Mail list logo