lilyp...@googlecode.com writes: > Updates: > Labels: -Type-Ugly Type-Critical > > Comment #2 on issue 2648 by > tdaniels...@gmail.com: Repeat Dots and > Staff Size in 2.15.41 > http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2648 > > This bug first appeared in 2.15.40, so is a critical regression.
We have too few critical regressions. I mean, we have too few categories for regressions. I can see the following: a) Precludes work (patchy/staging catches most of those) b) Precludes releases c) Precludes a stable release d) An eventual fix should be backported to last stable My personal opinion is that we overuse category c) because we don't want to think about d). It's nice aiming for a stable release that will never need a single backport or regression fix in its life time. But that nicety pales against the garishness of not giving the users anything ever. So what does it take to make option d) workable? For this kind of thing, it seems much more suitable than c). After all, the regression is in a somewhat outlandish area that few users actually are interested in. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
