Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> writes: > Then we'll have hard numbers on which developers are abusing the > process. I mean, sure, we all know whose patches tend to be great > and whose patches tend to be problematic... but a completely > automated, objective approach would remove any personal bias.
And those who generated more negative karma with their work than the average horse in the stables near our house will get banished from contributing for two weeks? Get real. When the cure is worse than the symptom, leave it alone. There is an old adage for programmers: don't check for errors for which there is no sensible means of treatment. if (1 == 0) cerr << "Your CPU or compiler may be broken." << endl; -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
