On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 08:22:32AM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
is it correct that all fixes, regardless of its annoyance, get a `low
priority' in case it won't become part of the next `milestone'
release?
That's not quite correct. There's no functional difference
between Postponed, Low, and
Graham Percival wrote:
Let me turn this around: you are one of our top 10 bug
hunters. If you had no previous connection to any of the
issues, how would you decide which bug(s) to work on? Would
you seriously just start working on whichever item *I* said
was most important / most annoying
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:15:21AM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
Let me turn this around: you are one of our top 10 bug
hunters. If you had no previous connection to any of the
issues, how would you decide which bug(s) to work on? Would
you seriously just start
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:15:21AM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote:
Personally, I don't think `priority'* or `annoying' captures it. I
would label them `embarrassing', because they're holding LilyPond
back from looking really professional.
But if
I'm using:
OS X 10.6.2
MacPorts 1.8.1
gcc 4.2.1
XQuartz 2.3.4 (Xtools? That's an abandoned project, isn't it? I think you meant
XQuartz.)
I installed all dependencies with MacPorts.
thSoft
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Oh yeah, maybe you meant Xcode. Yes, I use the standard Snow Leopard Xcode,
v3.2.1.
thSoft
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Le mercredi 09 décembre 2009 à 22:59 +, Trevor Daniels a écrit :
/home/trevor/lilypond-git/scripts/build/out/www_post LilyPond
2.13.9 ./out-www offline
Mirroring...
Traceback (most recent call last):
File /home/trevor/lilypond-git/scripts/build/out/www_post, line 67,
in module
map
Le mercredi 09 décembre 2009 à 20:19 +0100, Francisco Vila a écrit :
Thank you, now I have upgraded texi2html to v1.82 and have been able
to complete the process.
Ah, if you used a version older than 1.82, it probably doesn't normalize
the node names the same way.
I uncompressed it from
If you'd entered them yourself as both Medium, or both
Low, I wouldn't have said anything.
OK.
- Low: the normal priority. Sorry, but we just don't have many bug
fixers! I favor honesty over trying to make users happy about
assigning their pet issue a higher priority flag that nobody
Le jeudi 10 décembre 2009 à 03:44 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
On Wed, Dec 09, 2009 at 11:11:20AM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
4 lines of Texinfo multiplied by the number of languages, which
completely changes the deal.
It's still only a few minutes.
This can hardly be done properly
On 12/10/09 3:29 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:15:21AM -0800, Mark Polesky wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
But if nobody is working on fixing them, who cares what the label
is?!?!
The low vs. medium priority has historically been a
Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Wouldn't it be
helpful if I could check the priority flag of the bugs to find
something I should work on more urgently than other things? For
example, the Savannah bugzilla allows users to `rate' bugs. The
higher the score, the more people would like to have this bug
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 02:22:17PM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
- Low: the normal priority. Sorry, but we just don't have many bug
fixers! I favor honesty over trying to make users happy about
assigning their pet issue a higher priority flag that nobody
pays attention to.
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 03:09:28PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
I was just answering a request from Dénes, I never proposed to implement
myself in the coming days, but it seemed important enough to me to bring
this publicly.
Ok. Let's just agree to disagree: you think it's important, but I
If you would like to change the priority between postponed, low, and
medium issues -- either raising the priority of a postponed or low
one, or lowering the priority of a low or medium one -- go ahead.
I'll eventually do that for my own bugs. However, it's basically the
job of the bugmeister
1. Severity of the Bug.
2. Probability of occurrence of the bug.
3. Difficulty of working around.
Very nice!
Of course, I'm not proposing that anybody stop fixing bugs in order
to perform this calculation. I just wanted to get the thought in
this thread in case we ever want to seriously
Hi Ian,
LGTM, apart from some formatting issues and a few incorrect \version
numbers.
Can you sort out the naming of the new regression tests? For
consistency with the existing test, I'd advise amending them as follows:
hara-kiri-drumstaff.ly
hara-kiri-rhythmicstaff.ly
hara-kiri-tabstaff.ly
2009/12/8 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
I was amused by the recent punctuation fix commit: I've always
considered the CG to be the guide for contributors, or the
contributors's [sic] guide. In modern English, the latter is
abbreviated (condensed?) into the contributors' guide.
2009/12/9 Harmath Dénes harmathde...@gmail.com:
Apparently, this got discussed in:
http://www.mail-archive.com/fink-us...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg28916.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/fink-us...@lists.sourceforge.net/msg29280.html
but without solution. Can this be filed as a bug? Is there
2009/12/8 Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org:
See issue #926. This makes the Dynamics context quite useless.
Fixed in git.
Cheers,
Neil
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
2009/12/9 Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk:
Mark Polesky wrote Wednesday, December 09, 2009 9:05 AM
Wow. It's been just over 94 (and a half) *days* since my last transmission
here. If anyone is curious, I am still alive,
Hi Mark - good to hear it ;)
+1
I was beginning to wonder
Neil Puttock wrote:
No objections here.
Okay, I'll write a patch. But I just thought of something.
Should the `espressivo' script also be de-quantized, since
it's (in some ways) an extension of the accent sign? I'm
not aware of any mention of the `espressivo' sign in any
notation reference
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 07:44:59PM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
Of course, I'm not proposing that anybody stop fixing bugs in order
to perform this calculation. I just wanted to get the thought in
this thread in case we ever want to seriously approach this in the
future
I suggest
Graham Percival wrote:
It was added as a short-cut hack for
c1 {s4\ s s\ s\!}
So then I assume you're okay with me de-quantizing the
espressivo as well. Is the attached patch okay to apply, or
do I need to do anything described in CG 8.7 Adding or
modifying features? Should I add a @item
See issue #926. This makes the Dynamics context quite useless.
Fixed in git.
Thanks!
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
25 matches
Mail list logo
