Add
git checkout 2.0.2
before
git reset --hard HEAD
git pull
lasconic
2015-06-07 14:38 GMT+02:00 Robert Leleu robert.jean.le...@wanadoo.fr:
D'accord pour compiler 2.0.2
Je joins mon script.je ne comprends pas comment le moidfier pour
récupérer la 2.0.2
Robert Leleu
Je la
D'accord pour compiler 2.0.2
Je joins mon script.je ne comprends pas comment le moidfier pour
récupérer la 2.0.2
Robert Leleu
Je la 06/06/2015 23:54, Lasconic skribis :
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
Ok. (Incidentally, are we sure about the update notifier? I daily use 2.0
and have not been notified of 2.0.1 (yet?) ).
Yes, the update notifier works well on Windows and Mac. I test it for every
release.
It's completely disabled on Linux and BSDs since it's the role of the
package
lasconic wrote
Yes, the update notifier works well on Windows and Mac. I test it for
every release.
It's completely disabled on Linux and BSDs since it's the role of the
package management system on each platform.
Oh, I see, this explains everything. Thanks.
--
View this message in
@lasconic:
Is there a plan of the features planned to be included / developed for
MuseScore 2.1?
Another question: if we keep two branches next release and stable
release, which will be the target of the PR?
If we take the Qt model as an example: they have a tree of branches and
they suggest to
A plan for 2.1. Yes, sort of. More a plan for the next two or three major
releases. I still need to publish it on musescore.org. Also, the plan is to
adapt if someone is motivated enough to work on something that we didn't
think about.
I like to refer to the Qt project but I also understand we
First of all, I have no suggestions on the maintenance points.
About the main topic, FWIW I also believe that bug fixes are always welcome!
With a few notices:
1) Users do not always care (or even know) about product versions (many do
not even care about which OS they use...). I assume that
@Jojo
1- Because branch are cheap and it feels right to have a branch per
release. It's the same model Qt has for example.
4- We could try to remove no-obsolete. However, MuseScore 2.0 and MuseScore
2.0.1 are currently downloading translation files from different
directories. My plan was to
lasconic wrote
1- I agree that too short delays have consequences. However MuseScore has
an update checker and it will nag users every week or so to upgrade to a
more recent version. Also, I prefer having more user support to do with a
simple answer (Please upgrade) than not having a good
Hi,
We released MuseScore 2.0.1 a couple of weeks ago. Apparently users were
delighted to have a bugfix release after MuseScore 2.0. Since then, we
already have several bug fixes and even some new features. The initial plan
was to wait for 2.1 somewhere in the fall and not make more bugfix
2.1 gets into Beta or
RC status.
Bye, Jojo
From: Lasconic [mailto:lasco...@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2015 4:13 PM
To: MuseScore
Subject: [Mscore-developer] Preparing MuseScore 2.0.2
Hi,
We released MuseScore 2.0.1 a couple of weeks ago. Apparently users were
delighted
4:13 PM
*To:* MuseScore
*Subject:* [Mscore-developer] Preparing MuseScore 2.0.2
Hi,
We released MuseScore 2.0.1 a couple of weeks ago. Apparently users were
delighted to have a bugfix release after MuseScore 2.0. Since then, we
already have several bug fixes and even some new features
12 matches
Mail list logo
