[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 3631 in lilypond: 2.17 does a worse job with v
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: [Lilypond-auto] Issue 3631 in lilypond: 2.17 does a worse job with vertical spacing and/or the page layout than 2.16 |
Date: |
Sat, 02 Nov 2013 16:30:26 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) |
Mike Solomon <address@hidden> writes:
> On Nov 2, 2013, at 3:32 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>
>> On 02/11/13 15:12, Mike Solomon wrote:
>>> Not sure what a git formatted patch is…I can, however, download the
>>> Rietveld patch and send it to you if you want.
>>
>> Git can extract text patch files from your version history, which
>> can then be sent by email. It's a simpler way of getting patches
>> to/from people than needing to publish branches.
>>
>
> Ah, OK.
>
> The issue is that I don’t want to send anything from my computer for
> pushing, as my libguile is broken and I’m not comfortable sending a
> patch for pushing unless I’ve done a clean compile with it once just
> in case. The Rietveld version is the last reviewed and OKd one, so
> I’d prefer that someone pushes that.
That does not seem like it would magically compile itself any more than
when you send a properly formatted patch. Actually, it _will_ magically
compile itself (that's what Patchy-staging is for, but whatever. I'll
pick up from Rietveld if that's what you prefer, but it _does_ make more
trouble for yourself when rebasing and merging if a naked change is
getting pushed rather than a properly recognized git patch. With the
latter, git associates somewhat more identity.
--
David Kastrup