Ian Hulin <i...@hulin.org.uk> writes: > Hi David, Mark, > I am still around, I've not had much time for hacking lately as I've > been getting sick again, and the meds tend to sap the higher brain > functions.
I'll be taking a closer look in several days (my schedule does not really permit me doing much before the end of next week when I'll hold a talk about LilyPond). And I certainly wish you all the best for getting well. But the main points of what I wrote are not rendered invalid: you were put back repeatedly to square one by delays (whatever might have caused them), and if you had managed to do everything at once, the change would not have been easily reviewable, and would have made our change history very difficult to navigate, and would have rendered it very hard to track whether already made changes were lost. Just recently, we had a mishap with git and merging diverging branches that caused about two versions worth of work to disappear. I figured out a cure (probably not the optimal one), and about 35 already verified issues needed to get rechecked, by looking whether the changes had been properly reintroduced by my fix. This verification was achieved in several days due to the bug squad working overtime. And the patches that were checked only had to be checked to be present in the same place as before. If we would need to verify a large _reorganisation_ of the source to be up to date, this would be much much more intractable. We really need to be able to do this in smaller steps. And it is not your health that is causing a holdback, but rather the health of the project. I am glad for the information you gave here, and I'll try picking up on it after the conference. I wish you the best regarding your health, and with some luck, by the time you are interested in getting to work on LilyPond again, this rock of Sisyphos will already be on the other side, making room for more rewarding things. All the best -- David Kastrup