Re: order of engravers

[Carl Sorensen]

On 4/28/10 11:15 AM, "David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote:

> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
> 
>> In Carl's defense, he's horribly busy with end-of-term teaching (which
>> always penalizes one's real work, namely research) and then has a
>> conference to deal with.  When we deal with open-source volunteer
>> projects while we have that much stress in our lives, we all get
>> short-tempered.  I'm certain that you can think of examples from my
>> own emails.
> 
> Sure.  But there is always the option to not reply at all.  That takes
> even less time.  Or the mixed strategy: postpone answering (mark as
> unread or similar) and see if somebody else does it in time.  And I was
> not entirely joking when providing Carl with a stock answer I consider
> more conducive in most of the situations where he would answer like he
> did.
> 
> Yes, a stock answer is never a fabulous thing to get, but if a stock
> answer it is going to be, putting something nice into ~/stock might give
> slightly better payoff.
> 
> Whatever.  I have currently a few syntax projects in my Lilypond pipe,
> so it is unlikely that I will work on topological sorting anytime soon
> (which is basically what this is about).

This is what I was assuming when I wrote my initial response.  It seemed
like "a good idea for somebody to do", not an offer of somebody wanting to
make the change.

Now, I was wrong in jumping to that assumption and responding accordingly.
But it appears that my assumption was, in fact, correct.

Carl