|
From: | Anthony W. Youngman |
Subject: | Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs |
Date: | Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:20:00 +0100 |
User-agent: | Turnpike/6.05-U (<82R6TZbUPTytI1mvj+U+2eUfGt>) |
I talked with Han-Wen about 2.10. The reason that we got up to 2.10.*33*, is that with git, doing stable bugfix releases is almost painless. Very little effort. We have small, contained patches/commits, that can be very easily cherry picked into stable. Now with CVS, it was hairy. This is a very nice and cheap way of supporting users. Users should not run development releases, but having fast-turnover regular stable bugfixing updates is *very* *very* nice.
Like that 3/4 6/8 beaming issue ... (for those who didn't spot it, quavers in 3/4 time were grouped in threes!)
Now I've got a big chunk of lilypond code with bugfixes for that, that will be redundant as soon as I upgrade. Imho it's a broken methodology that makes users put "one version only" bugfixes into their code. Fortunately, here, the user code is not going to be broken by a lily upgrade, but I expect that has (and will) happen.
Cheers, Wol -- Anthony W. Youngman - address@hidden
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |