[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Emacs lilypond mode

From: Werner LEMBERG
Subject: Re: Emacs lilypond mode
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2019 00:12:07 +0100 (CET)

>>>>> PS: I'll fix the `yyout2grammar' script.
>>> Done, see
>> So what is
>> all about

Formatting only.  No change in behaviour.

>> I didn't see any email that this was pushed or had been OK'd to
>> push.

While in general I like a conservative approach to patches, there are
situations where trivial changes like the commit in question –
essentially whitespace only, with slight reformulations of comments –
should be pushed directly to the repository.  I even think that they
are not worth an e-mail to the list.

In particular, I would like to see many of David K's changes
immediately pushed to `staging' – except in situations where he
actually wants comments.

The interesting part of my changes which *do* cause a different output
are then in issue #5468, making the patch much easier to read IMHO.

The idea behind this is to speed up development.  I know of no other
project which quarantines so much trivial changes.  Very often, patch
C needs patch B, which in turn needs patch A.  Since Rietveld always
shows a single patch per issue, not being able to visualize a series
of commits, it's *very* time consuming to prepare issues that fit
single commits.

I admit that unreviewed, direct commits to `staging' sometimes fail,
and I have already caused some trouble.  However, reverting is rather
easy with git.

Am I alone with this opinion?  Please comment.


reply via email to

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