Re: GOP-PROP 13: patch management tools (probable withdraw)

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 10:53:13PM +0200, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> > I can't
> > see why locating and implementing a code management system which handles the
> > process as well as centralising the discussion, is a Bad Thing.
> 
> I don't suppose that he meant it's a bad thing.  I think Graham's
> concern is that we've not moved forward.  In order to choose a better
> tool, someone must investigate the alternatives and describe pros and
> cons of each of them - then we can actually do something.

Yes.

In business terminology, treat lilypond-devel like a board of
governers.  Sometimes discussion moves into brainstorming for a
bit, but at some point it turns into a waste of time.  I want a
sub-committee to investigate these tools, write a report, and
bring it back.  Then we will discuss the report -- we're not just
going to immediately accept the recommendation; I want reasons
behind the recommendations so that we can discuss them in more
detail.  That's what I've tried to do with all the other
proposals, with varying degrees of success.

At the moment, I'm assuming that the sub-committee will be myself.
I don't have the time to do this right now, so consider it shelved
until... oh, late October or so...?

If other people want to form a subcomittee seriously investigating
other tools, great!  If that subcommittee identifies a general
policy question that needs to be settled before they can continue
their work, then by all means bring a proposal back to
lilypond-devel to debate and decide on that specific point.

Again, I could probably find a few general policy points from that
discussion and get them clarified, but I don't have the time.  If
somebody else wants to do this, great.

Cheers,
- Graham