[Top][All Lists]

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

GOP: plan for June 2012

From: Graham Percival
Subject: GOP: plan for June 2012
Date: Fri, 1 Jun 2012 22:33:19 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)

Here's the plan so far for this month.  The beginning is delayed
due to the amount of work and volunteer availability.

Unless otherwise specified, each discussion will set the policy
for the next year.  If there's something you feel strongly about
but are unable to discuss at the scheduled time, let me know and
we'll reschedule it.  As before, the initial discussion will be
started, then a week later we'll have a tentative policy, then
another week later we'll have a firm policy as long as there's no
great disagreement.

2012 June 13: lilypond is GNU software.
  The fact that we belong to GNU is not open to debate, but we
  should clarify our obligations.  In the past we haven't paid a
  great deal of attention to those, but given certain recent
  events I think this should change.  I estimate it will take
  10-50 hours to meet the requirements of GNU packages.  This
  discussion will consist of itemizing what needs to be done and
  ideally also gather volunteers to do this work.

2012 June 20: release policy.
  The ever-popular debate about when we should have stable
  releases.  I have a radical proposal which would eliminate a
  great deal of uncertainty after a one-time cost of about 100
  hours of work from semi-skilled contributors.  This discussion
  will only effect lilypond 2.18 and up; 2.16 will be released (or
  not) under the current policy.

2012 June 27: source code formatting.
  Hopefully this will go smoother than previous discussions; this
  should just be a "rubber stamp" discussion, but we'll have it
  each year.  We're discussing it now so that for the rest of the
  year we can eliminate debate on it by saying "we discussed it in
  June 2012, and we won't talk about it again until June 2013".
  Proposal is to remain with astyle 2.02+fixcc for C++ code, and
  have another call for a scheme indenter (requirements posted on
  -devel a few weeks ago, but they were basically "do what emacs
  does, except use spaces instead of tabs+spaces").

- Graham

reply via email to

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