Re: biweekly Critical issues plea

[Carl Sorensen]

On 1/19/11 2:51 PM, "address@hidden" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Graham et all,
> 
> I have read all of the postings and am up to date - I meant "what next" as a
> general question to the community in the sense of "would anyone who was
> actually involved in the pushing of this commit (Joe - I see your name
> associated with it - how much work did you do on it?) like to give me some
> guidance as to where to go so that I can find that which ultimately causes
> this regression?"  In terms of man hours, I think that a little time invested
> by the people who were involved in producing the commit would be more
> efficient than my learning how lilypond functioned back when this was pushed.
> That said, if the response is "I have no clue," then I will get to figuring it
> out.
> 

IIUC, Neil's proposed patch to this issue was to add KeySignature to
pure-print-callbacks.

See http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2011-01/msg00169.html

But I haven't dug in to try to figure out exactly what that means. Given
what I know about Neil's suggestions, if you're trying to actually fix this
bug, I'd recommend you figure out what that means and do it.

Thanks,

Carl