[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: polychords: a working solution
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: polychords: a working solution |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Feb 2012 12:19:03 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) |
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 12:03:01PM -0000, Phil Holmes wrote:
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Percival"
> <address@hidden>
> >On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 10:40:49AM -0000, Phil Holmes wrote:
> >Since nobody is willing to either update the files himself, or
> >organize other people to do them, there's no point discussing
> >matters with the admin.
>
> I don't recall anyone asking for a volunteer. I'll do it.
You have impressive email filters.
does anybody care about LSR?
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-06/msg00761.html
LSR lovers: walk the walk
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-07/msg00116.html
LSR updating to 2.14
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-08/msg00278.html
% (somebody offered to handle it, but health issues arose)
we need organizers
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-09/msg00265.html
hands off LSR and makelsr.py
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2011-09/msg00247.html
oh wait, some of those are probably about the LSR import, rather
than updating it to 2.14.
The reason I make such a fuss about the bug squad not working is
that they are the tip of the iceberg. There are a TON of other
maintenance tasks that aren't being done[1]. I've almost
completely given up trying to get those happening because the bug
squad is the easiest, most clear-cut job we have, and historically
even that hasn't gone smoothly. (it does appear to have improved
in the past few weeks)
[1] such as doing a full LSR import every week.
- Graham
- Re: polychords: a working solution, (continued)
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/16
- Re: polychords: a working solution, David Kastrup, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Graham Percival, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, David Nalesnik, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, James, 2012/02/17
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Graham Percival, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Graham Percival, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, David Kastrup, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Thomas Morley, 2012/02/18
- Re: polychords: a working solution, Graham Percival, 2012/02/18
- Re: LSR updates: was: polychords: a working solution, Phil Holmes, 2012/02/19