2011/5/3 Carl Sorensen <[email protected]>: > On 5/3/11 5:45 AM, "Francisco Vila" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 2011/5/3 Francisco Vila <[email protected]>: >>> Hello, I have noticed that master is now 2.15; we on the >>> lilypond/translation branch have unmerged work and more is to come. >>> If master is now 2.15, what's the official mechanism planned for >>> incorporate latest translations to the upcoming 2.12 stable? >> >> A possible solution is that I merge into master(2.15) as usual but I >> make a list of commits for Carl to cherry-pick them onto 2.14 . Sounds >> right? > > I would recommend that translators work from stable/2.14, rather than from > master. > > I'm perfectly willing to have translation patches pushed to stable/2.14.
Thanks. Previously I need to know exactly which commit is to be considered the first one to be backported. We have a stable/2.14 branch which also contains 2.13.60 and 2.13.61 tags. Then, we have master and there is lilypond/translation branch on which 'master' has been frequently merged. The other way, ie merge translation onto master is not clearly marked as such, maybe because of my usual order of commands. I sometimes merge master onto lilypond/translation, check translations status, then checkout master and merge lilypond/translation onto it. This sequence produces no merge commit in master, other than previous merge master onto lilypond/translation which comes from lilypond/translation branch. Sorry if it sounds confusing. To summarize, it is difficult to know which exact translations come before or after the fork. IMHO a good thing would have been to fork a new stable/2.14/translation branch from stable/2.14 at the same time stable/2.14 was created; that way we would know where we are. Could we still create a stable translation branch and work on it? I can not work on a single branch (our current lilypond/translation) as if it were two branches (stable translation + 2.15 translation), and that's the current landscape. I could take care of porting commits from the current lilypond/translation to stable/2.14/translation for my own. Any bug in this branch could never be considered a critical regression, therefore it would not block stable releases, so this kind of backporting is not very critical. -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
