Joseph Rushton Wakeling <[email protected]> writes: > On 24/09/13 17:10, Phil Holmes wrote: >> Poor syntax; poor explanation; unnecessary; failure to compile; failure to >> follow standards. > > OK. What are the typical patch-reviewer reactions to each of these?
Why don't you look in the issue tracker? You'll get comprehensive and accurate answers. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
