Re: preliminary GLISS discussions

[David Kastrup]

Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 3:15 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> At the Waltrop meeting, Janek proposed a number of interesting but
>>> potentially disruptive changes to the lilypond syntax.  On a
>>> personal note, I really like most of them, but it will take a good
>>> chunk of work before they're ready to discuss on the main
>>> development list.
>>>
>>> Further complicating issues is that it quickly became apparent
>>> that I am not personally qualified to judge if a proposal is ready
>>> for main discussion.
>>
>> Wouldn't the purpose of a discussion be to present and discuss
>> advantages and drawbacks?  The question of _discussing_ a change is in
>> my opinion quite different from _implementing_ a change.
>
> I suppose Graham meant that proposals presented for main discussion
> should be well-shaped and free of big and/or obvious problems.

If there are big and/or obvious problems, the discussion would be short
anyway.

-- 
David Kastrup