David On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 10:06:48 +0200 David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote:
> James <p...@gnu.org> writes: > > > David, > > > > On Thu, 17 Aug 2017 09:21:03 +0200 > > David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> Can't think of anything right now. > >> > > > > How about the 'Fixed_x_x_x' label we use in the tracker when a > > patch is pushed. So for example if we continue to put the unstable > > version there is that 'good enough'? > > If the next unstable release is slated to be 2.21.0, maybe we should > adjust this accordingly. It would then be my job on cherry-picking to > add a Fixed_2_20_0 label. > Sounds reasonable. I am sure Mr Holmes will chip in if he has any objections as he does that bumpy-build-number thing :) James _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
