On 11/28/13 3:33 AM, "David Kastrup" <[email protected]> wrote: >"Phil Holmes" <[email protected]> writes: > >> From: "James" <[email protected]> >> To: "Devel" <[email protected]> >>> >>>We have the problem that lily-git.tcl is a "well-meant" tool. The >people who have written and changed it are not the people using it. >That's a recipe for trouble because it means deficiencies in every-day >use will not be seen by the persons who are in the situation to change >it.
This is true. It was written to Graham's specifications. > >That would suggest that using a particular branch would require writing > >LILYPOND_BRANCH=[name of the branch] lily-git.tcl > >If we have a single-user tool, maybe it would be worth revisiting the >changes and the implied workflows. Carl, any ideas about what makes >sense here? There seems to be enough in this particular patch that >reverting all of it would appear excessive. I will be happy to fix this, at least in a rudimentary way. We have pushHead defined, so we can play with that variable. > >>> It really has put me off making any more doc contributions because I >>> end up having to relearn all the git cli each time as I don't live >>> and breathe git and the instructions in the CG assume some broad >>> knowledge that I don't have. It's become a game of luck as to >>> whether I end up with a patch or a borked tree. >>> >>> I don't develop separate branches and those that are skilled enough >>> to do that don't use Lily-git.tcl. James, if you will share with me the problems you are having, I'll try to make it work for you. >The main advantage that lily-git.tcl should have over one of the >abundant git helpers around nowadays is that its knowledge of branches >and their layout and policies can be specific to LilyPond. The >dev/local_working idea seems inflexible, bad for working on more than >one patch at once, and not specific to LilyPond. It was intended to be inflexible, because the flexibility of git was one of the main obstacles to its use (for a novice). In fact, that's what you see in James's comments -- he doesn't want to learn git. He just wants to push the buttons and have things work right. Of course, he doesn't want things to work *wrong* when he pushes the buttons. > >Hampering James, however, is also a really bad hit for LilyPond. Is >there anybody who'd be willing to work with James in getting >lily-git.tcl into a shape where it's more flexible and easy to use? It's probably a question of adding a bit of flexibility and maintaining the current ease of use. > It >would appear that at the current point of time, just rowing back some >selected changes will already accomplish a lot. I actually don't believe that rowing back those changes will fix things. But if they do, I'm certainly willing to do it. Thanks, Carl _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
