Re: 2.21.0 Issues all verified!

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Am Sonntag, den 17.05.2020, 00:28 +0200 schrieb David Kastrup:
> Personally, so far my main issue is, well, the workflow bypassing
> issues.  Changes that are only presented as merge requests without any
> accompanying issue are just too intangible for my taste: those
> correspond more to what we previously said "things like that you can
> push directly to staging".  I find it awkward to find my way around
> them, and after pushing there does not seem an obvious reverse relation
> to a tangible report that one could easily derive from seeing the commit
> in the repository.
> 
> I prefer having an actual issue number for the details for anything of
> non-trivial nature.

I agree on having an issue for every bug we fix, especially those
coming from the bug-lilypond list. It's easier to have those in one
place instead of searching if a merge request happens to fix a problem.
For cleanups, compiler warnings or performance work I think having only
a MR is fine. In my opinion creating an issue for about any code change
is somewhat overkill. But there are guidelines mandating this, so I'd
be open to discussing the merits if somebody thinks it's the better
approach. After all, we had this previously...

Regards
Jonas

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part