Re: [translations] Re: 2.18 release plans (again).

[David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>]

Janek Warchoł <janek.lilypond@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 2013/10/27 David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>:
>> Janek Warchoł <janek.lilypond@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>
>>> 2013/10/26 David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx>:
>>>> I've now pushed stable/2.18 and synchronized translations to it.
>>>> I hereby declare the stable/2.18 branch my sole property, to be ruled
>>>> over dictatorially.  As long as nobody else pushes to it without my
>>>> permission, I pledge to keep and lead it to releasable state to the best
>>>> of my conscience and abilities.  Translations may merge from it (and
>>>> should not be merged from master until stated otherwise).
>>>
>>> Ok, thanks!
>>> So, we can slowly get back to discussing unstable material unless it's
>>> not very disruptive, or would you like us to wait a moment?
>>
>> Discussion is never a problem.  Anything requiring convert-ly changes is
>> on hold to master for practical reasons (version number monotonicity).
>
> So, would it be possible to get issue 3239 reviewed?  It's waiting for
> half a year, and solving merge conflicts when i rebase it gets
> irritating.

I don't tell people what they are supposed to review.

> It's a rewrite of Self_alignment_interface, making it easier to align
> grobs in various ways.  I think that it's self-contained, shouldn't
> introduce regressions (as it doesn't change the logic of calculating
> alignment) and it can be written in a way that doesn't require
> convert-ly.