severity 380855 important thanks > It seems to me that lilypond, which only creates private modules, is > in the category of packages which does not need a change to work > correctly, but for which the suggested changes in the policy document > are good to make (the automatic recompilation, perhaps).
It seems you misread the bug report, that was part of a mass bug fill that targeted all the packages that build private modules, that /do/ need an upgrade (to handle binNMUs for extensions and/or new bytecompilation gracefully in the future) > Work on the 2.8 version of lilypond is proceeding; it would not be > productive to spend too much energy on 2.6 right now. that is your call as a maintainer, but that does not makes that bug less real. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O [EMAIL PROTECTED] OOO http://www.madism.org
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
