On Oct 22, 2011, at 10:55 AM, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
>
> On Oct 22, 2011, at 6:10 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 08:18:39PM +0100, Peekay Ex wrote:
>>> I think 1d9a73b13ee576d28c0f41f5b243f2ebb1ff9fcf is the checkin that
>>> breaks make doc.
>>
>> It's a good thing that I looked at this at 5am, because upon
>> examining the commit I unleashed a loud obscenity. I use the word
>> "mao" in real life as well as online; I can count the number of
>> times that I've used a curse word within hearing of anybody else
>> on one hand.
>>
>> Mike, please examine the fix carefully:
>> a6a3f2bfa82f7c9e8f7b153a4cb649beaef80c16
>>
>> In the future, please push to the dev/staging branch. I'm not
>> asking you to check the compilation yourself, nor am I asking you
>> to refrain from making "simple" "last-minute" "fixes". But
>> there's been too many (i.e. more than 1 per year) little problems
>> like this.
>>
>> dev/staging will be merged with master at least once every 24
>> hours[1] as long as it
>> compiles. Furthermore, I pledge that I will *always* merge from
>> dev/staging (if it compiles) before making a release. So it
>> really adds no significant delay to getting your bugfixes+features
>> in the hands of users.
>>
>> [1] possibly once every 12, 8, or 4 hours, depending on whether
>> people with powerful computers want to leave their computers
>> running overnight, and/or if we could coordinate timing with
>> people in different time zones -- we could have each person run it
>> every 24 hours, but if we stagger it between 3 or 4 people we
>> could get great coverage.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> - Graham
>>
>
> Hey all,
>
> Sorry for the breakage - I'll fix it this afternoon.
> Thanks for the reminder about dev/staging - I had forgotten about it, and it
> is true that this would avoid unexpected crashes.
>
> Could you point me to the place in the CG with instructions about how to push
> to dev/staging and/or give me instructions for how to do that via email?
>
> Cheers,
> MS
Re-hey,
My make doc is chugging along without a hitch, and I just saw that Graham
pushed a fix for a mistake in changes.tely.
I'm assuming that this fixes the problem, and if so, I apologize for putting
@{Beam} and not @code{Beam}. This was, as Graham said, a last minute add-on
that I thought was automatically checked during make all (I thought that all of
the docs' syntax was checked in `make all', and that `make doc' built the
examples). Thanks for the catch, and sorry for the omission!
Cheers,
MS
_______________________________________________
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
