>> In other words, some makefile hacking is needed, which I would
>> probably need to delegate.
I agree.
> I doubt that the regtests compile without warnings,
Correct. Some of them are even expected to emit warning or error messages.
> and I'm not certain that we have enough Frogs to eat all the issues
> that would be added if we went this route.
Perhaps it makes sense to classify regression tests like this:
a) intentionally emit warnings and errors
b) unintentionally emit warnings
c) run fine
Item c) should be the default, this is, such regression tests
shouldn't be mentioned specially.
Regression tests from item a) must be collected, of course.
Everything else should go to item b), and the job of volunteers would
be to make this list empty.
Werner
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
