[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Stable release proposal

From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: Stable release proposal
Date: Tue, 17 Jan 2012 11:45:26 -0000

Carl, Although I'm not a current developer, I'd like to comment.

In general I agree, but with the caveats below:

Carl Sorensen wrote Tuesday, January 17, 2012 1:27 AM

So after hearing from most of the currently-active developers, I think a
reasonable goal for 2.16 would be:

1) Work through the outstanding issues involved in issue 2070  -- Don't
wrap EventChord around all note heads.  This is probably a big issue, but
I think with David working on it it will happen quickly once we work
through the issues.  To me, this is the biggest outstanding issue, but I
think it will be worth tackling.

This looks like a big undertaking.  I think we need to be advised
by David about this.  Well worth doing if he is agreeable and

5) Remove translations if they are not updated to 2.16.  The 2.14/2.15
manuals can be used if desired.  Having non-updated manuals removed may
serve as an incentive to get them all translated.

I'd prefer to see all translations carried forward, even though they
are incomplete, much as we carry forward the English documentation,
even though much of it is incomplete.

B) Guile 2.0.  I think there's enough going on with Guile 2.0 on their
side (adding local-eval back in) that we shouldn't push this for the next
stable release.

Leave out.  This looks as if it needs a long run in.

Werner wrote:

Normally, a route to a stable release means a code freeze, applying
only fixes to problems within the code.  This also means that no new
bug fixes get applied.  Are we going to do the same?

I think Werner means fix only things that are not working as
advertised, but defer fixes that are improvements to layout.
If so, I agree.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]