On Mon, May 31, 2010 at 07:59:20PM -0400, Kieren MacMillan wrote: > Graham, > > > Since none of those are in the tracker as a Critical issue, none > > of them are show-stoppers for 2.14. > > May I say that > <http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=884> > being labelled as "medium" causes me to wonder about the whole bug > prioritizing system. Is there some logic to what makes something "critical"?
A regression. If 884 created good output in 2.12, then by all means point this out and it'll be re-categorized. Note that even truly embarrassing mistakes are not Critical -- those are High. I wouldn't call 884 "truly embarrassing", though. At least, not in comparison to various other longstanding bugs. (are you starting to understand why I'm so short-tempered when people talk about grand new features and the like?) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
