Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
Francisco Vila writes: > 2013/4/26 Federico Bruni : >> >> 2013/4/24 Don Armstrong >>> >>> It will be uploaded to unstable once the current testing releases >>> (wheezy). Then it will transition to the new testing (jessie), and >>> soon after that I'll make an upload to backports. >>> >>> Because 2.16 released well after the freeze of wheezy, it won't be >>> included in the release. > ... >> >> Anyway, good to know that 2.16 will reach testing and backports >> quite soon. > > Just a note to point out that Ubuntu Raring (released april) comes > with lilypond 2.16 Oh wow. 2.16.0, but that's more than I'd have expected. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
2013/4/26 Federico Bruni : > > 2013/4/24 Don Armstrong >> >> It will be uploaded to unstable once the current testing releases >> (wheezy). Then it will transition to the new testing (jessie), and >> soon after that I'll make an upload to backports. >> >> Because 2.16 released well after the freeze of wheezy, it won't be >> included in the release. ... > > Anyway, good to know that 2.16 will reach testing and backports quite soon. Just a note to point out that Ubuntu Raring (released april) comes with lilypond 2.16 -- Francisco Vila. Badajoz (Spain) www.paconet.org , www.csmbadajoz.com ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
2013/4/24 Don Armstrong > > I wonder what it's stopping from being included in testing and if we > > can help somehow. The Debian freeze should end soon, I think. The > > current bugs are here: > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=lilypond;dist=unstable > > It will be uploaded to unstable once the current testing releases > (wheezy). Then it will transition to the new testing (jessie), and > soon after that I'll make an upload to backports. > > Because 2.16 released well after the freeze of wheezy, it won't be > included in the release. Doh, the freeze of wheezy started in July (I thought it started just 2 months ago). Yes, two months before the first release of 2.16 Anyway, good to know that 2.16 will reach testing and backports quite soon. ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
On Wed, 24 Apr 2013, Federico Bruni wrote: > The next Debian stable, which is going to be released in a few days, > will have 2.14 again. Hopefully 2.16 will be added to backports in > the next future. But it's in experimental since september: > http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/lilypond.html > > I wonder what it's stopping from being included in testing and if we > can help somehow. The Debian freeze should end soon, I think. The > current bugs are here: > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=lilypond;dist=unstable It will be uploaded to unstable once the current testing releases (wheezy). Then it will transition to the new testing (jessie), and soon after that I'll make an upload to backports. Because 2.16 released well after the freeze of wheezy, it won't be included in the release. > Anyway, what about these bugs? Free free to e-mail them and/or close them with specific examples. > #153782 is the famous grace note synchronization problem. Shouldn't this be > closed? Or it's kept to prevent (hopefully) new bug submissions? > > #694067 seems closed as well This just affects lilypond; the actual bug is in ghostscript. Don Armstrong -- "A one-question geek test. If you get the joke, you're a geek: Seen on a California license plate on a VW Beetle: 'FEATURE'..." -- Joshua D. Wachs - Natural Intelligence, Inc. http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
2013/4/24 David Kastrup > > The next Debian stable, which is going to be released in a few days, > > will have 2.14 again. > > "Again"? > > Current Debian stable has 2.12.3. So we are making progress. yes, you are right however, having 2.16 would be a better progress lilypond is not in the backports: http://backports.debian.org/ that may be a place for 2.16 ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Re: lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
Federico Bruni writes: > Speaking about LilyPond on Linux... yesterday I've seen that version > 2.16 is still in debian experimental: > http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lilypond > > The next Debian stable, which is going to be released in a few days, > will have 2.14 again. "Again"? Current Debian stable has 2.12.3. So we are making progress. > The Debian freeze should end soon, I think. If a glacier calves, has it stopped freezing? -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
lilypond 2.16.2 soon in Debian?
Speaking about LilyPond on Linux... yesterday I've seen that version 2.16 is still in debian experimental: http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=lilypond The next Debian stable, which is going to be released in a few days, will have 2.14 again. Hopefully 2.16 will be added to backports in the next future. But it's in experimental since september: http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/lilypond.html I wonder what it's stopping from being included in testing and if we can help somehow. The Debian freeze should end soon, I think. The current bugs are here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/pkgreport.cgi?pkg=lilypond;dist=unstable Oh, wait.. good news: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=705895 Anyway, what about these bugs? #153782 is the famous grace note synchronization problem. Shouldn't this be closed? Or it's kept to prevent (hopefully) new bug submissions? #694067 seems closed as well #437267 is marked as fixed-upstream on version 2.14.2, which means that it's fixed in Debian as well. Shouldn't it be closed then? #143709 is invalid, as pointed out by Carl Sorensen. Why it's still open? Thanks Don for your work! Cheers Federico ___ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
