On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 11:26 PM, Graham Percival <[email protected]> wrote: > Umm, no? I mean, literally no? Other than the first+last > releases of each stable branch, those files are gone.
Then I'm sorry to hear that. In case my honest opinion matters (hint: it doesn't), I think you screwed up big time on this. It wouldn't have taken much to do a local backup (hell, I could have launched a wget on my server and we'd have a whole clone by now). It obviously may not matter to you, but I still remember when Rune needed to track something that had occured in 2.6 or earlier. I know in an ideal world, we'd all be able to build any version at any given time, but having old development binaries *can* be useful every now and then. (It also allows regular users to bisect on their own and narrow down a regression's appearance, which can save the devs quite some time.) And before you ask, no I'm not saying I could do a better job than you in your other tasks within the LilyPond project :-) > If you can > find some old binaries on some old mirror, go for it... but the > old middle-of-release binaries that used to be on lilypond.org are > gone now. (sigh) OK. Then I guess we'll have to make do with whatever's left. (Or install old libraries/compilers in VMs if we have to try and compile oldish intermediate versions.) > I'm not planning on removing the .0 and .last stable release > binaries, so don't worry about those. Then again, there's no harm > in grabbing a copy now just in case. I'm wgetting them now (it's messed up but i'll clean it up later). (Stable or not, I guess 2.6 and 2.4 binaries are gone too.) In any case, I'll try and keep a mirror up-to-date on files.lilynet.net. Cheers, Valentin. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
