"Trevor Daniels" <t.dani...@treda.co.uk> writes: > David Kastrup wrote Monday, September 21, 2015 9:16 AM > >> No, that's not entirely related. I may give up on a particular >> approach to an issue, making it pointless to pursue a particular >> patch, but still want to cook up a different patch or solve the >> problem in the context of another issue. Patch abandoned just means >> that the latest proposed patch is not going to be pursued further, >> not that the issue owner has given up on a particular problem >> altogether. > > We don't really have a mechanism to handle multiple patches, so I think > we can discount that possibility.
Sorry, but that just does not match reality. We have a host of issues where multiple patches have been proposed. While we only assign a state to the latest patch with a reference in a comment, this state has a number of degrees of freedom independent from that of the issue. > We usually use Patch needs_work to cover the situation where the > current patch is inadequate and further work is in progress. I'd > rather adopt my interpretation as a more useful use of this limited > set of markers, namely that Patch abandoned really means, "I've given > up on working on this issue and the current patch is now up for grabs > for someone else to improve on it." That's issue ownership. And the difference between "Started" and "Accepted". -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
