I created the 2.0.2 branch but I changed my plan a bit. I was going to cherry pick the vast majority of the commits of master so I figured out it was be better to branch master and remove what we didn't want. So here is what I did.
1/ I created 2.0.2 branch based on master 2/ I talked with Werner and on IRC, I talked with Marc, Jojo, to find out the changes we did that would make files created in 2.0.2 not look right in MuseScore 2.0 and 2.0.1. We found a couple of things * storage of irregular measure and breakMMRest property in measure is done differently in master * Master uses the new met* symbol from the last version of bravura in tempo texts. 2.0 and 2.0.1 don't have this symbol. 3/ I made changes in the 2.0.2 branch to solve these two problems. If you can think of anything else, or if you find a file made in nightlies that don't open correctly in 2.0/2.0.1, please report. 4/ I changed the version to 2.0.2 in the code. Starting from today, nightlies on Mac and nightlies on Windows are built from the 2.0.2 branch. It would be great if Linux nightlies could use this branch too. Regarding translations, I reactivated the push to Transifex and I removed the -noobsolete flag when calling lupdate. Transifex should get the strings added in the 2.0.2 branch and keep deleted strings. However we might have deleted some strings between 2.0 and 2.0.1... The process in charge of getting strings from transifex and store them for the resource manager has also been updated and now store the strings in two folders, one for 2.0.1 and one for 2.0.2. Since we could have removed strings for 2.0 I didn't do anything yet, so 2.0 will not receive translations updates for now. Leon, the 2.0.2 branch is based on master. So the pull parser is on by default. The addition of this branch doesn't change the development process. The master branch is still the reference, we should use it to make PR. I will monitor the commits and cherry pick them in the 2.0.2 branch until the release. The goal is still end of june, beginning of July. lasconic 2015-05-29 7:13 GMT+02:00 Leon Vinken <[email protected]>: > Indeed, my preference would be to switch over to the pull parser by default > a.s.a.p., to get broader test coverage. I have done all the testing I could > think of, now I need additional testers to find the corner cases I forgot. > > Regards, Leon. > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://dev-list.musescore.org/Preparing-MuseScore-2-0-2-tp7579373p7579431.html > Sent from the MuseScore Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > _______________________________________________ > Mscore-developer mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mscore-developer >
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________ Mscore-developer mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mscore-developer
