On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 06:37:08AM -0700, Carl Sorensen wrote:
What about option 0 -- try to coordinate the resources we currently have
available on the critical issues?
I would like that. I'm a bit surprised to see so many people
talking about branching a stable/2.14 -- I don't think that
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Trevor Daniels t.dani...@treda.co.uk wrote:
Graham Percival wrote Tuesday, November 30, 2010 8:04 AM
I'm willing to try it as an experiment, but I
really doubt that having a separate branch would encourage more
people to spend more time on critical issues.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 11:16 AM, Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
I'll wait another day for comments in case anybody missed it due to
the savannah list downtime, but I despite my objection, I'll branch
stable/2.14 in the next few days unless anybody speaks heavily against
it.
On 11/30/10 1:04 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 06:37:08AM -0700, Carl Sorensen wrote:
What about option 0 -- try to coordinate the resources we currently have
available on the critical issues?
I would like that. I'm a bit surprised to see so
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 8:33 AM, Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
2) release 2.14 ASAP with no critical flaws, but with some kind of
code freeze.
Many software projects implement a freeze before a release --
when the project is frozen, this means that no changes are
allowed,
Graham Percival wrote Monday, November 29, 2010 7:33 AM
With that in mind, I'm reopening the same question as the 24 Oct
email.
2) release 2.14 ASAP with no critical flaws, but with some kind of
code freeze.
I prefer a variant on this. Branch 2.14 now and apply only
patches to critical
On 11/29/10 12:33 AM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
What do you think? This is not a vote, but I would like to hear
from people. I am hoping that we can find a reasonable amount of
consensus.
What about option 0 -- try to coordinate the resources we currently have
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 11:33 PM, Graham Percival
gra...@percival-music.ca wrote:
2) release 2.14 ASAP with no critical flaws, but with some kind of
code freeze.
Many software projects implement a freeze before a release --
when the project is frozen, this means that no changes are
On 11/29/10 4:49 AM, Valentin Villenave valen...@villenave.net wrote:
(PS. Perhaps now would be as good a time as any to publicly state that
I'm leaving the project by the end of the year, partly due to
aforementioned dissatisfactions. So whatever I might have to say until
then can, and
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Valentin Villenave
valen...@villenave.net wrote:
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 6:22 PM, Patrick McCarty pnor...@gmail.com wrote:
I also think it would be useful to have two code freezes on
stable/2.14: one for code/docs, and one for translations (right before
the
A brief reminder of the timeline:
- 18 Sep 2010: we need to sort out various policies, but let's
wait until 2.14
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2010-09/msg00178.html
- 22 Sep 2010: alpha test 1 for 2.14, only 1 critical issue
11 matches
Mail list logo
