Menu
▾
▴
#989 ensure that no information about 2.12.3 features is only in the regtests
Originally created by: *anonymous
Originally created by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
Some information can only be found in regtests... even worse, it's only
present in the *comment* of a regtest. It's therefore only visible to
people with the source code.
A few things come to mind immediately -- the gonville.ly font-switching
instructions, internalational font packages listed in utf-8.ly -- but it
would be good to thoroughly examine the whole lot.
And by "it would be good", I mean "I will not release 2.14 until it's done".
Originally posted by: pkx1...@hotmail.com
?
All the reg tests were listed, and as I (and others) docced them the list was reviewed by Phil who removed the reg tests from the wiki and left those that needed to be done.
It was because no one was looking thoroughly through them that this tracker item took so long to do. However I think Phil has done this and can only say that waiting until 'someone' else does it is a waste of time. I mean, what does it take to get a tracker item approved?
Originally posted by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
Neil: technically the "one last look" should be done in the "verifying" phase, so there's no problem marking this "fixed".
James: because there were so many people working on this -- and in particular, given the confusion at the beginning between Valentin and then nobody and then me for a bit and then Phil but he was learning and oops apparently LSR snippets need to be tagged with "docs" **and** something else and then etc -- I don't think that asking for another "review" is casting doubt on any one person's abilities.
... that said, I can't see it being worth spending hours verifying this particular issue, given that 1217 is almost the same. In particular, any time spent working on 989 would be better spent on 1217. So I propose, as release manager, that we skip the "verification" for this issue.
Labels: fixed_2_13_32
Status: Fixed
Originally posted by: percival.music.ca@gmail.com
No complaints yet, so I'm declaring it "good enough", with the reminder that issue 1217 is basically the same thing.
Status: Verified