Re: how shall I handle "issues to verify"

[Graham Percival]

On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 03:10:46PM -0800, -Eluze wrote:
> 
> when a bug is fixed its status changes to "fixed" and one would think it's
> just peanuts to verify that once the new version is out 

Yep.  :(
Either verify the issue, or raise a fuss about not having it
verified.

> OK, I thought, let's attack them, the more issues resolved the more energies
> can be directed to new objects! - they are dating back from September to
> January (closing date)  but also some of them deal with topics I never
> encountered before (or I haven't used them): I've never used lilypond-book,
> emacs, probably I've used python or guile in the background - but certainly
> I'm not in the position to verify such specific issues.

You could try asking on -user for help with something.  For
example, does the OSX version work now?  If so, 1781 can be
verified.

> I wonder who is going to clarify these issues!?

The bug squad is responsible for this task.  That doesn't
precisely answer your question, though.

> then I  stumbled upon issue 2109 "do not tinker with the position of a
> pitched rest" where I couldn't find a description of the issue, only
...
> shall I open a new issue and close 2109? suggestions?

Please open a type-Critical regression for this.

- Graham