Re: Issue 1716 in lilypond: No convert-ly rule for the fix for issue 1655

[lilypond]

Comment #2 on issue 1716 by address@hidden: No convert-ly rule for  
the fix for issue 1655
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1716

OK, so what really happened was that we moved from an internal property  
(use-breve-rest) to a pair of user properties (round-to-longer-rest and  
usable-duration-logs)?  I can see an argument for no convert-ly rule in  
this case.

If I were a user playing around with use-breve-rest, and it suddenly didn't  
work anymore, how would I know why?  Would I just have to ask on -user and  
hope that somebody knew the answer?

I can't see a simple way for a user to track this.  I'd like to get  
something established as a policy for how we deal with such a situation so  
that information will be readily available to users.

A convert-ly rule is the easiest way I know of to make such information  
available.  We could also do it as part of the commit message when the  
patch was committed.