2012/9/18 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org>: > Benkő Pál <benko....@gmail.com> writes: > >> hi David, >> >> I saw you marked line_count related issues for backport. >> is that my task, yours or common? > > Mine. > >> what should or can I do? > > I was actually planning to contact you in private about this. I am in > the somewhat unfortunate situation of having admitted the line_count > changes into 2.16.0 where they cause changes including definite > regressions for some previous behavior, regressions that are not > continuing into 2.18. The task I am faced with is to bring 2.16.1 into > a state where its behavior cures the regressions in 2.16.0 without > creating a divergence. > > The goal is to be sure that people upgrading from 2.14.2 to 2.16.1 to > 2.18.0 will not have to change some things for the first upgrade, and > change it back again for the second one. So 2.16.1 should not veer off > the course only to get back. For 2.16.0, I failed in that endeavor. > > The patches I have marked "Backport" are those that I have to take into > consideration when deciding how to best fix that failure in 2.16.1. I > won't take material into 2.16.1 that has not previously been released in > an unstable release and seen some exposure. And I have to guess at the > likelihood that it will be reversed or partly reversed before 2.18. > > The simplest course would be to reverse all the line_count material to > 2.15.40 behavior. However, there are definitely some things (like the > time signature stuff) where I am reasonably sure they'll stick around in > this form (because not much else makes sense as we figured out), so > moving forward from 2.16.0 rather than backward makes sense. > > For other things, I just don't know yet.
how can I help? I can try my regtests with 2.14; I can also create some new ones. and that reminds me to something I wanted but forgot to ask: can a new regtest be versioned to an old one (or it must be added per the current version)? p _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel