On Sunday 09 May 2004 10.55, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Werner LEMBERG writes: > > I suggest that the lily-bugs stuff is `officially' used to document > > bug fixes in the ChangeLog file. > > Yes, but I'd suggest something like > > * lily/ottava-bracket.cc (print): use coordinate, not (0,0) for > empty extent. Fixes: #67. > > Or maybe, Fixes: misplaced-octaviation.ly.
that's fine, though "Fixes: misplaced-octaviation" would be fine enough as well (that's really the bug identifier, it's more minimal too). This is not at all important though. The important thing is "Fixes:" entries though: Please make sure to use exactly the word 'fixes' for each fix. This would make grep happy, when I look for bugs to update. > The backportme is no longer necessary; the bug number tells you that. Really, how? It is not the case that each fix for a bug which is common for 2.2 and 2.3, should be backported. Some fixes are too nontrivial. Also, bugs are reported separately for 2.2 and 2.3. Erik _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
