Re: build system work

[Graham Percival]

On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 01:43:19PM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
> On 11-03-04 01:05 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
> >http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/patch-handling
> >
> For the sake of keeping an eye on the issues list, looking for
> "patch-review" then applying the test as listed, I'm pretty
> comfortable with offering to take that on, Graham, especially if it
> frees up more highly-leveraged time than mine.

Excellent!  Although it's the other way around... and I see that
the CG is misleading on this point.  You should look at all *non*
patch-review issues, and see if they "deserve" to be patch-review.
Developers aren't expected to look at patches that aren't
patch-review.

- Any Patch-new should be categorized as Patch-review (if it
  passes the tests), or Patch-needs_work if not.

- Any Patch-needs_work or Patch-abandoned that has an updated
  version of the patch, should be tested to see if it can be
  Patch-review.  For this point, you need to skim lilypond-devel
  to see what's been updated.

I'll think about a CG patch tomorrow... actually, could you make
one?  That'll be a quick test of your git setup, and your
understanding of the issue, and also saves me 15 minutes having to
think of how to phrase it in the CG.


PS I'm fairly certain that at the moment, all "needs_work" issues
do not have any "more recent" drafts that you need to look at.

Cheers,
- Graham