@w{@code{-devel}} community into actually reviewing said patches, and
finally pushes the patches once they're accepted. This person is
@emph{not} responsible for training new programmers, because that
-would be far too much work -- he job is @qq{only} to guide
+would be far too much work -- his/her job is @qq{only} to guide
completed patches through our process.
Currently: Carl
@subheading Installing patchy
-To install patchy, you should run do the following:
+To install patchy, you should do the following:
@enumerate
@item
-Create a new user on your box to to run patchy; this is a security
+Create a new user on your box to run patchy; this is a security
step for your own protection. It is recommended that this should
not be an administrator. New users are created from System;
Administration; Users and Groups.
@item
Get the patchy scripts from
@example
-https://github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/
+@uref{https://github.com/gperciva/lilypond-extra/}
@end example
Patchy is in the @file{patches/} directory.
@end example
Not much appears to happen except you can see a lot of CPU gets
used if you open System Monitor. There's not much point running
-@code{lilypond-patchy-staging.py} unless there something in
+@code{lilypond-patchy-staging.py} unless there is something in
staging to be merged to master, however, if there's nothing in
staging then the script won't waste resources by compiling
anything.
@node Administrative mailing list
@section Administrative mailing list
-An mailing list for administrative issues is maintained at
+A mailing list for administrative issues is maintained at
@code{lilypond-hackers@@gnu.org}.
This list is intended to be used for discussions that should be kept
@itemize
@item
-Clarify the various development tasks by writing down the polices
+Clarify the various development tasks by writing down the policies
and techniques and/or simplifying the tasks directly.
@item
code.
Having 1 more normal user answering emails on lilypond-user won't
-have a dramatic trick-up affect all by himself, of course. But if
+have a dramatic @q{trickle-up} effect all by itself, of course. But if
we had 8 users volunteering to answer emails, 6 users starting to
write documentation, and 2 users editing LSR... well, that would
free up a lot of current bug-fixing-capable contributors to focus
Although GOP is a short-term project, the main goal is to train
more people to handle ongoing jobs. The more people doing these
-jobs, the ligher the work will be, and the more we can get done
+jobs, the lighter the work will be, and the more we can get done
with lilypond!
Also, it would be nice if we had at least one "replacement" /
documentation. It would be great if somebody could create
properly-formatted patches for these corrections.
-Technical requirements: ability to run @ref{Lilydev}.
+Technical requirements: ability to run @ref{LilyDev}.
@item LSR editor:
LSR contains many useful examples of lilypond, but some snippets
often find them in Ponds of Lilies) and new feature implementors.
Technical requirements: development environment (such as
-@ref{Lilydev}), ability to read+write scheme and/or C++ code.
+@ref{LilyDev}), ability to read+write scheme and/or C++ code.
@end itemize
@item
anything which stops contributors from helping out (e.g.
lily-git.tcl not working, source tree(s) not being available,
-lilydev being unable to compile git master, inaccurate
+LilyDev being unable to compile git master, inaccurate
instructions in the Contributor's Guide 2 Quick start).
To limit this scope of this point, we will assume that the
-contributor is using the latest lilydev and has read the relevant
+contributor is using the latest LilyDev and has read the relevant
part(s) of the Contributor's Guide. Problems in other chapters of
the CG are not sufficient to qualify as Type-Critical.