Re: Metronome sign overlaps notes

[Erik Sandberg]

On Thursday 10 February 2005 13.49, Sebastiano Vigna wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-02-10 at 13:53 +0100, Erik Sandberg wrote:
> > This is a known bug. It's possible that it's even mentioned somewhere in
> > the manual (but I can't find it now).
>
> Just to know, would Lilypond's developers interested in a bugzilla for
> Lilypond being created (e.g., on the LSR server)? I think it is not
> difficult to set up.

We are rather happy with the current model. There are 3 kinds of bugs:
1. lily doesn't build/run
2. error in documentation
3. lily behaves strangely

I can only speak for #3, for which I'm responsible. But I can imagine that 
bugzilla is not so useful for 1-2.

But for bug class 3, my current method is: For each bug report, I verify it 
and isolate it as a .ly file, and add it to a CVS repository. In the .ly 
file, I add a short text description, a comment about the reporter, and some 
flags for bug classification (such as urgency). This is easily done by hand.

After a while, the bug gets fixed, and someone marks the bug as fixed. I scan 
through the list sometimes and try to verify all fixes. For each verified 
fixed bug, I close it (which is done by some scripted cvs commands).

The point with this approach, is that
a) I have direct access to all the .ly files of the bug database. This is very 
convenient; I don't need to upload files via http or something.
b) It's easy to get a visual overview of the entire database, see 
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.5/bugs/out/index.html (which currently is a bit 
broken, there shoudl be a text description for each bug).

There are negative sides also:
c) I am the only person who can add bug reports to the database. If the 
project grows, it might be better if others could help. But this is not yet a 
problem.
d) With a bugzilla-style db, it would possibly be easier for users to browse 
all fixed / earlier reported bugs, to avoid reporting already reported bugs. 
This is not a problem for me (those doubles happen pretty rarely, so I have 
time to reply to them all). However, one could argue that it's more work for 
an user to write a report than to scan a db and see that it's already 
reported.

IMHO, a bug tracking system would have to fulfill both least a) and b), and 
fix both c) and d), if it should be worth moving. (and I think c,d are 
fixable using a cvs approach as well).

I don't think bugzilla would fulfill these demands. A better choice would be 
to make a special section for bugs in LSR, and create an interface so that 
(a) and (b) above are fulfilled. This would be a very nice step, however it 
would consume of your time and I don't think it's urgent. I suggest that this 
could wait, at least until LSR has grown bigger & a lot of people start to 
use it regularly.

Erik