On Thu, Jan 19, 2012 at 06:10:14PM +0000, Carl Sorensen wrote: > > On 1/19/12 10:05 AM, "Graham Percival" <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > > >The proper thing is to: > >- make a branch > >- do a local lsr update
maybe better to push right here? > >- make your code and doc change > >- do a local lsr update > > Why is this the proper thing to do? hmm, I have to admit that I'm no longer certain about this. > The objective is to get the new snippet into the tree. The way to get the > new snippet into the tree is to add it to D/s/n and do a makelsr.py. But > this also updates a bunch of other files. Why is not preferable to throw > away all the rest of the changes, which will be redone as part of a > release? Err, "redone as part of a release"? There's no makelsr.py step in http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/minor-release-checklist I'm open to somebody adding it to the release steps, but as a point of fact, currently the only time that makelsr.py is run is when Phil does it once every month or two. > Unless we are going to expect *every* user to do a local makelsr.py for > *every* branch they create, it seems unreasonable to ask them to do it in > advance for some branches. I was suggesting that every contributor does a local makelsr.py for every branch they create that modifies D/s/n/. This would be a lot less confusing if we had regular local makelsr.py updates. Or if we just always did it after modifying D/s/n/ or the D/s/n/ translations. Or something like that. - Graham _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
