Re: Issue 2018 in lilypond: Patch: parser.yy: allow postevents in function arguments in general

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:53:03AM +0000, address@hidden wrote:
>> I don't particularly like "Patch-needs_work: Review has identified
>> some problems" status when the only "problem" is that the patch is
>> based (and consequently blocked) on another patch.
>
> fine, I invented a
>   Patch-waiting: Patch is blocked, but still needs review
>
> I'm not convinced that 7 different patch levels is great; the more
> labels we have, the harder it is to capture their status at a
> glance.  But I agree that the previous situation was sub-optimal,
> and I'm not interested in discussing any optimal solution at the
> moment.
>
> We can revisit this in GOP in 2012.

I would have just kept it at at "Patch-new" until the block was gone.

-- 
David Kastrup