On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:56:42AM +0000, adam.spi...@gmail.com wrote: >> Thanks Carl, I've made these changes, and I've also made a corresponding >> patch for changes.tely, but I don't think I have permission to upload >> new patch sets for either to this issue since it says "Can't Edit" at >> the top-left - can you give me permission? > > I doubt it. Just upload a new issue.
So then we would have *three* Rietveld issues tracking the same thing. >> (If not, this is yet another >> reason Rietveld sucks. It all seems way too locked down to me.) > > It's not build for collaborate patch editing. The idea is that > you have a patch, you upload it. Make a few small modifications, > go ahead and upload it to the same rietveld number... but anything > major and you should just make a new rietveld number. Numbers are > cheap, after all. > > Note that problems like this are fairly rare. If we had an active > "frog meister", he'd be taking care rieveld for any inexperienced > contributors. And experienced developers like you would be > directed to git-cl, so nobody would have uploaded any patches for > you anyway. Understood, but I still think this workflow is fundamentally flawed. However I'm aware this is not the time nor place to discuss this further. _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
