[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LSR status
From: |
Graham Percival |
Subject: |
Re: LSR status |
Date: |
Wed, 27 Aug 2008 09:41:04 +0100 |
On 8/26/08, Valentin Villenave <address@hidden> wrote:
> 2008/8/25 Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden>:
>
> Hi Kieren,
>
>> However, if the Lilypond community is depending on *any* resource as
>> heavily
>> as it appears to be (or want to be) relying on the LSR, that resource
>> needs
>> to maintain ~ 99% uptime.
>
> The LSR brings many advantages and it would be a disaster to not have
> it anymore.
I wouldn't say that it would be a disaster; I still don't think that
it's been used enough to say that the loss would be *that* bad.
> And note that many LSR snippets are duplicated in LilyPond sources
> (input/lsr/).
Indeed -- if LSR dropped off the face of the planet, the docs would be
entirely unaffected. I wouldn't have allows the system to be set up
in any other way.
Cheers,
- Graham
- LSR status, Kieren MacMillan, 2008/08/25
- Re: LSR status, Valentin Villenave, 2008/08/26
- Re: LSR status,
Graham Percival <=
- Re: LSR status, Eluze Weehaeli, 2008/08/27
- Re: LSR status, Graham Percival, 2008/08/27
- Re: LSR status, Eluze Weehaeli, 2008/08/27
- Re: LSR status, Reinhold Kainhofer, 2008/08/27
- Re: LSR status, Damian leGassick, 2008/08/30
- Re: LSR status, Johan Vromans, 2008/08/30
- Re: LSR status, Damian leGassick, 2008/08/30
- Re: LSR status, Valentin Villenave, 2008/08/30
- Re: LSR status, Damian leGassick, 2008/08/30