On 14/12/2011 10:21 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
It would be nice if you adding the above to that tracker issue.
Done.
--
Julien
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 03:01:23PM +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
> Which kind of work is involved?
python scripts.
> There's an issue about it on the tracker?
Probably not. I've pretty much abandoned adding Frog items,
really, since nobody pays attention to them.
> I can find just this:
> http:
2011/12/14 Graham Percival :
> 2. the old lilypond.org/web/ pages are still up (and probably
> still in google's cache), various links point to those, which
> gives the impression that our project died 3 years ago or
> something.
> Some of that work needs to be done by you, me, or Han-Wen, but
> mo
Graham Percival writes:
> Umm, have you missed my work on automating patches and fixing the
> CG lately? I want to make sure that we treat *current* developers
> fairly, before trying to recruit new ones. We've lost a *lot* of
> potential effort from Trevor, James, Phil, Colin, probably Adam,
>
Jan Nieuwenhuizen writes:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> At the moment, the top 3 problems for publicity that I see are:
>
> Okay, now we're getting somewhere. I would like to add a top
> reason
>
> 0. we don't really have a clue what LilyPond's priorities should be,
>and where our individua
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:36:06AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Well, I personally don't care. If somebody wants to work on
> > advertising, or even better, work on things which encourage other
> > people to do advertising for us, they're welcome to do so.
>
>
Graham Percival writes:
> It attracted positive attention on lilypond-user. I never said
> *how* much attention it received.
Right.
> Well, I personally don't care. If somebody wants to work on
> advertising, or even better, work on things which encourage other
> people to do advertising for u
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:55:04AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
> > attract positive attention
>
> Are you sure?
It attracted positive attention on lilypond-user. I never said
*how* much attention i
Graham Percival writes:
> Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
> attract positive attention
Are you sure? On what fora was the 2.14 release announced? Did it
eventually make lwn.net? Has anyone checked how many followers we have
on FB or Twitter (MuseScore, anyone?).
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:06:56AM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
> FWIW, I've found that GUB on x86-64 Oneiric will choke building
> cross-compiled components, with error messages saying "unable to
> identify extension of x", where x is the x.o form of a tool. This
> points, according to GCC, to m
On 11-12-12 04:16 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Graham Percival writes:
STABLE RELEASE
Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
attract positive attention, they get updated docs and bugfixes and
new features into the hands of users, etc. We had the first two
release candidate
Graham Percival writes:
> STABLE RELEASE
>
> Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
> attract positive attention, they get updated docs and bugfixes and
> new features into the hands of users, etc. We had the first two
> release candidates back in Sep. Unfortunately, we'v
Here's where we stand.
STABLE RELEASE
Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
attract positive attention, they get updated docs and bugfixes and
new features into the hands of users, etc. We had the first two
release candidates back in Sep. Unfortunately, we've had Critic
13 matches
Mail list logo