Re: critical issues -- hope you're having fun

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Tue, Jan 03, 2012 at 02:57:24PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> James <address@hidden> writes:
>> 
>> > My question to David, because I am not getting where the 'ire' is
>> > coming from, why do you care if we release dev after dev release vs
>> > stable?
>
> Yeah, especially since Carl was *already* making good progress on
> the GUB-related critical issues.
>
>> <URL:http://xkcd.com/386/>
>
> yep.
>
> Let's cut to the chase: I am an evil semi-overlord.  I jealously
> guard my ssh login to lilypond.org (along with Han-Wen's and
> Jan's), I am fickle, and I like to play with small kittens.  Due
> to my evil fickle nature, I am not going to change the stated
> policy until it has been in place for at least 12 months.  Any
> critical issue will block a stable release.  I am chuckling
> maniacally and delighting in how evil and wrong I am being.
>
> Don't like it?  You have three (effective) options:
> 1. don't add regressions.

The problem is that this actually falls into the categories
1a) don't mention regressions
1b) don't make significant enhancements
1c) don't contribute enhancements

> 2. fix (or help fix) any critical issues.

This is usually implemented as
2a) shrug your shoulders since they don't concern you and wait another
year.

> 3. build your own binary releases.

Usually done as

3a) never mind, I got my own checkout.

-- 
David Kastrup