2011/7/31 David Kastrup <[email protected]>: > Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: > >> On Sun, Jul 31, 2011 at 09:42:36AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote: >>> Graham Percival <[email protected]> writes: >>> >>> > I haven't seen any interest in >>> > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1771 >>> >>> My take on this (if nobody is going to protest in the next few hours) is >>> to revert the flawed fix. >> >> I think that's entirely reasonable. IMO, if there's no clear >> offer of a fix within 48 hours of a bad commit, we should revert >> it. > > Within 48 hours of pinpointing the bad commit.
+1. If we manage to get stable releases every few months, i think a policy of reverting any flawed commit that appeared after last stable release (i mean x in 2.x.y, not y) would be good. I can help with these bugs when i close currently opened issues and sort out my repository after grand fixcc-ing (estimated to happen next weekend). cheers, Janek _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
