[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Lilypond patchy and other Lilypond problems

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Lilypond patchy and other Lilypond problems
Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2012 07:28:38 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux)

Łukasz Czerwiński <address@hidden> writes:

> On 28 April 2012 10:30, Graham Percival <address@hidden>
> wrote:
>     As long as I'm not personally playing nursemaid for people
>     who don't run the basic tests
> It seems that the whole talk about running tests is only because of me
> not running them before uploading my first patches because I didn't
> know that I should do it.

More like uploading patches with known problems.  The notehead merging
code would have given wrong results with pretty much every test merging
noteheads.  It's not like you missed out on running the regressions test
suite: you did not apparently run any file relevant to the patch, and
ignored the reviews repeatedly.

> Do you have any other examples of committers that did not run tests? I
> guess that you don't have.

Plenty.  Overall, the discipline has increased a lot in recent months,
but partly because the procedures have been streamlined, partly because
I was the one running the tests and tend to be somewhat less linear in
my response than a karma point system.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

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