> right uh i feel like this one needs an e-mail
> https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/984
> it's abt merging noteheads
>
> from what i could gather, a successful patch was created & pushed
> rather quickly, in the matter of months, though it didn't fix
> everything. so they decided to keep the same issue open to preserve
> the comment history, but with a different desc. and then proceeded
> to not change the desc?? the original example in the issue is
> fixed. the example given in the 20 may 2013 comment by k-ohara still
> yields the same result in v2.25.31. should the description be
> replaced to have that one instead, and the title be changed to
> something like "notehead merger is inconsistent with chords"?
This is an example of how not to handle issues in the tracker. The
right way – at least in most situations – is to report an issue, to
fix it, and to open a new issue with a new, concise description in
case there are more cases to consider that the fix doesn't handle
correctly. Today, we are using the 'Milestone' feature in a much
stricter way than before the migration to gitlab.
If you want to help please do exactly that: open a new issue, then add
a reference to issue #984 (and vice versa) and close it.
Werner
