lily-user <qroup...@gmail.com> writes: > Thanks Phil. That fixed it. However, isn't this something that should > be done automatically?
Most bugs have the annoying property not to fix themselves automatically. This particular one is <URL:http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=34>. As you can see in the issue report, Keith is occasionally working a bit on it. As you can see by the assigned bug number in the tracker, it would be optimistic to expect this to magically become fixed in a short time span as long as nobody is interested in investing more serious resources (like time or money) that would seriously increase the interest in getting this fixed. Again, the low bug number suggests that mere complaining on the mailing lists is a resource that has been amply exercised by this amount of time and does not really add to the excitement factor of solving this problem. > It becomes a hassle for huge scores e.g., with more that 10 > staves. Isn't it hard to add that to each staff and keep track of it > in a huge score? Do I have to synchronize it even in the middle of a > score? Depends on what you do in the middle of the score. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user