Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

[Anthony W. Youngman]

In message <address@hidden>, Jan Nieuwenhuizen 
<address@hidden> writes
> I talked with Han-Wen about 2.10.  The reason that we got up
> to 2.10.*33*, is that with git, doing stable bugfix releases
> is almost painless.  Very little effort.  We have small,
> contained patches/commits, that can be very easily cherry
> picked into stable.  Now with CVS, it was hairy.  This
> is a very nice and cheap way of supporting users.  Users
> should not run development releases, but having fast-turnover
> regular stable bugfixing updates is *very* *very* nice.

Like that 3/4 6/8 beaming issue ... (for those who didn't spot it, 
quavers in 3/4 time were grouped in threes!)

Now I've got a big chunk of lilypond code with bugfixes for that, that 
will be redundant as soon as I upgrade. Imho it's a broken methodology 
that makes users put "one version only" bugfixes into their code. 
Fortunately, here, the user code is not going to be broken by a lily 
upgrade, but I expect that has (and will) happen.

Cheers,
Wol
--
Anthony W. Youngman - address@hidden