getting `random' patches reviewed

continuation of http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2013-07/msg0.html James wrote: >> Hey, why isn't this patch on the countdown list? >> https://codereview.appspot.com/10759043/ >> >> I posted it to -devel here: >> >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2013-06/msg

Re: getting `random' patches reviewed

Mark Polesky writes: > Should I start a new tracker issue for every little change I > want to make? Yes. It's easy to do with git-cl. >   That seems excessive. It gives independent verification. > Should I just push to staging?  That seems counter to the > spirit of the whole countdown thin

the website is offline

http://lilypond.org/ is currently unavailable. - Mark ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: getting `random' patches reviewed

hello, On 05/07/13 19:55, David Kastrup wrote: Mark Polesky writes: Should I start a new tracker issue for every little change I want to make? Yes. It's easy to do with git-cl. That seems excessive. It gives independent verification. Should I just push to staging? That seems counte

Re: getting `random' patches reviewed

James wrote: > What's the rush? I never said anything about a rush. My question was "What's the right way to do this?". - Mark ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: the website is offline

- Original Message - From: "Mark Polesky" To: "lilypond-devel" Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 8:46 PM Subject: the website is offline http://lilypond.org/ is currently unavailable. - Mark It is. If it's not back tomorrow, I'll follow it up. -- Phil Holmes

Re: the website is offline

On Fri, Jul 05, 2013 at 09:49:27PM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote: > - Original Message - From: "Mark Polesky" > > To: "lilypond-devel" > Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 8:46 PM > Subject: the website is offline > > > >http://lilypond.org/ is currently unavailable. It's back. Paul Scott > > >

Create a two-argument form of define-event-class (issue 10965043)

I didn't apply the patch and I can't review C++, though, after a first quick glance, some nitpicks: https://codereview.appspot.com/10965043/diff/1/scm/define-event-classes.scm File scm/define-event-classes.scm (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/10965043/diff/1/scm/define-event-classes.scm#

Re: Create a two-argument form of define-event-class (issue 10965043)

Reviewers: thomasmorley651, https://codereview.appspot.com/10965043/diff/1/scm/define-event-classes.scm File scm/define-event-classes.scm (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/10965043/diff/1/scm/define-event-classes.scm#newcode87 scm/define-event-classes.scm:87: (define ancestor-lookup (make