On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 07:58:32PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuyshanw...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. All it takes is bookmarking the site, checking it whenever
there's a release, and reporting any broken examples. However,
nobody is willing to
On Tuesday 18 August 2009, John Mandereau wrote:
Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 16:20 -0400, David Raleigh Arnold a écrit :
You do a great job summarizing the minor versions of the development
versions, but there is nothing in news-gmane-lilypond.devel about
stable
minor changes.
The only
2009/8/16 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
(nobody checks the regression tests for each release, for example
-- and that's trivially done with a web browser!)
As far as I can remember, Stan Sanderson was in charge of the regtest
checking (but perhaps this needs to be updated?).
That
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 10:51:40AM -0400, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
What I do not understand is how mere bugfixes are irrelevant to the
user of stable releases. Seems to me that fixes are the most important
factors, if not the only factors, in making a choice of *minor* versions
of stable
Le lundi 17 août 2009 à 16:20 -0400, David Raleigh Arnold a écrit :
You do a great job summarizing the minor versions of the development
versions, but there is nothing in news-gmane-lilypond.devel about stable
minor changes.
The only changes in stable releases so far have been bugfixes (that
[CC to -devel]
(nobody checks the regression tests for each release, for example
-- and that's trivially done with a web browser!)
That reminds me of an idea I recently had: Wouldn't it be possible to
automatically generate a sort of checksum for each regression-test
output-file and compare
Le dimanche 16 août 2009 à 14:34 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit :
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:48:53AM -0400, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
I don't see any straightforward way of seeing a changelog or
anything which tells the differences between minor releases.
The git log messages
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Montag, 17. August 2009 16:08:36 schrieb Michael Käppler:
[CC to -devel]
(nobody checks the regression tests for each release, for example
-- and that's trivially done with a web browser!)
That reminds me of an idea I recently had: Wouldn't
between minor releases.
The git log messages.
And the news item and lilypond.org, which is also sent by email to
info-lilyp...@gnu.org.
There's a NEWS/Changes document that shows any major changes.
Other than that, the only location are the git log messages. No,
we're not going to add
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 05:17:08PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
Am Montag, 17. August 2009 16:08:36 schrieb Michael Käppler:
(nobody checks the regression tests for each release, for example
-- and that's trivially done with a web browser!)
That reminds me of an idea I recently
Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 17, 2009 10:35 PM
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 05:17:08PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer
wrote:
Am Montag, 17. August 2009 16:08:36 schrieb Michael Käppler:
(nobody checks the regression tests for each release, for
example
-- and that's trivially done with
2009/8/17 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
Yes. All it takes is bookmarking the site, checking it whenever
there's a release, and reporting any broken examples. However,
nobody is willing to commit to do this. 15 minutes whenever
there's a release, which happens at most once every
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 10:55:37PM +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
2009/8/17 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
Yes. All it takes is bookmarking the site, checking it whenever
there's a release, and reporting any broken examples. However,
nobody is willing to commit to do this. 15
2009/8/17 Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca:
I think that's normal for a .0 release.
I assumed the same, but 2.12.0 has results against 2.11.66 (OK, that
didn't officially exist since I made a mistake doing a version bump
before 2.12) and 2.11.65.
Oh, yet another problem with the lack
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 6:35 PM, Graham
Percivalgra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
Graham was referring to the fact that nobody seem to bother about looking at
those automatically-created regression results before or after a release.
Yes. All it takes is bookmarking the site, checking it
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuyshanw...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes. All it takes is bookmarking the site, checking it whenever
there's a release, and reporting any broken examples. However,
nobody is willing to commit to do this. 15 minutes whenever
there's a release, which
I don't see any straightforward way of seeing a changelog or
anything which tells the differences between minor releases.
I think I can justify x.x.1 on one machine and x.x.2 on
another, but I would like to know what the differences are
to avoid open manholes. Is there a CHANGELOG somewhere
On Sun, Aug 16, 2009 at 11:48:53AM -0400, David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
I don't see any straightforward way of seeing a changelog or
anything which tells the differences between minor releases.
The git log messages.
I think I can justify x.x.1 on one machine and x.x.2 on
another, but I would
18 matches
Mail list logo
