1 Feb 2009 13:35
Fw: \crescTextCresc... 2.10 vs 2.12
Trevor Daniels <t.daniels <at> treda.co.uk>
2009-02-01 12:35:22 GMT
2009-02-01 12:35:22 GMT
Forwarded for the archive ... Trevor ----- Original Message ----- From: "Carl D. Sorensen" <c_sorensen <at> byu.edu> To: "Trevor Daniels" <t.daniels <at> treda.co.uk>; "Frédéric Bron" <frederic.bron <at> m4x.org> Sent: Saturday, January 31, 2009 9:36 PM Subject: Re: \crescTextCresc... 2.10 vs 2.12 This sounds like a good Frog task to me. There are a few things that need to be done before we make the patch. 1) Make a table of all the crescendo and decrescendo forms, so we can see at a glance the missing/broken pieces. 2) Make a patch for the docs for v. 2.12. 3) Make a patch for v. 2.13 (when it's started) to get the appropriate symmetry for all forms. This will require posting the table from 1) on -user and getting feedback from users. 4) Make a patch for convert-ly, which will do two things: a) fix the problem you've identified for the previous convert-ly rule for 2.12 b) Make a correct convert-ly rule for 2.13.(Continue reading)
I suck at the CG, I'll strive to do something an evening after midnight, I
have no other free time next week (including next week-end).
> Most of all, the stability rule about 2.12 was imposed too quickly
> and came as a shock to most developers. We'll have a much longer
> stable 2.14, but I think it's better to move to 2.13 sooner rather
> than later. About a month ago, I said that we'd move to 2.13 at
> the beginning of Feb.
Oh yes, time has flown so quickly...
Cheers,
John
RSS Feed