Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Am 25.03.2015 um 07:50 schrieb David Kastrup: So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every >font defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main >focus would be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably >didn’t put so much work in features of Latin script. > >Would you care to try a different font? Well, why would the sans-serif font be TakaoPGothic in the first place? I think we should be using the same default fonts on every installation. We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and make them the default? I think chances that a default sans-serif is anywhere near visually suitable for a LilyPond score are pretty small. Usually they are chosen for very different purposes (i.e. clean screen display for user interfaces). While I think DejaVu Sans (default here) is a good font for its purposes it's really ugly when used in a LilyPond score. Urs ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Urs Liska writes: > Am 25.03.2015 um 07:50 schrieb David Kastrup: >>> So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every >>> >font defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main >>> >focus would be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably >>> >didn’t put so much work in features of Latin script. >>> > >>> >Would you care to try a different font? >> Well, why would the sans-serif font be TakaoPGothic in the first place? >> I think we should be using the same default fonts on every installation. >> > We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and > monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. > Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an > option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with > LilyPond and make them the default? As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and monospace, respectively. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
>> We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and >> monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is >> something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to >> find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and >> make them the default? > > As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard > PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and > monospace, respectively. Mhmm. If we are going to ship a sans-serif font, I strongly recommend something prettier than those two butt-ugly fonts. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Am 25.03.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Werner LEMBERG: We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and make them the default? As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and monospace, respectively. Mhmm. If we are going to ship a sans-serif font, I strongly recommend something prettier than those two butt-ugly fonts. Ehm, just to be sure: Would we have to ship these fonts in the LilyPond distribution or could we consider them present anyway? If we'd have to include them anyway then I'd also second the wish to look for an alternative. Urs Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Urs Liska writes: > Am 25.03.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Werner LEMBERG: We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and make them the default? >>> As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard >>> PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and >>> monospace, respectively. >> Mhmm. If we are going to ship a sans-serif font, I strongly recommend >> something prettier than those two butt-ugly fonts. > > Ehm, just to be sure: Would we have to ship these fonts in the > LilyPond distribution or could we consider them present anyway? They are required fonts. Now shipping and installing fonts of our own additionally would not make a fundamental difference since we are shipping and installing our own music fonts anyway. But fonts with a reasonably complete coverage of Unicode do not exactly tend to fall from the trees and take a lot of space. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Fwd: Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Sorry, this had accidentally gone private ... Weitergeleitete Nachricht Betreff:Re: Ghostscript 9.15 Datum: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 09:31:49 +0100 Von:David Kastrup An: Urs Liska Urs Liska writes: Am 25.03.2015 um 08:51 schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Am 25.03.2015 um 07:50 schrieb David Kastrup: So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every font defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main focus would be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably didn’t put so much work in features of Latin script. Would you care to try a different font? Well, why would the sans-serif font be TakaoPGothic in the first place? I think we should be using the same default fonts on every installation. We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and make them the default? As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and monospace, respectively. I don't think Helvetica is visually much better, but I agree that it would be an improvement. It is not a matter of "better" but of reproducible scores. As it is now compiling scores using sans-serif or monospace (without explicit font selection) can come out quite differently on different users' computers. Which is bad. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Disappearing barlines with skipBars - possible bug?
At 00:03 on 25 Mar 2015, Thomas Morley wrote: >I disagree. >\set Score.skipBars = ##t _is_ intended to affect notes _and_ useful! >Don't limit your thoughts to modern music. > >Below I retyped (quick'n dirty) the last bar from Missa Papae >Marcelli, Sanctus by Palestrina taken from an edition which tries >transforming the original in sort of modern notation. That is an interesting case. It would seem to me that ideally there should be two properties (perhaps three?) to control this behaviour for notes, rests and multimeasure rests respectively. -- Mark Knoop ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Am 25.03.2015 um 09:35 schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Am 25.03.2015 um 09:01 schrieb Werner LEMBERG: We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here. Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with LilyPond and make them the default? As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard PostScript fonts. Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and monospace, respectively. Mhmm. If we are going to ship a sans-serif font, I strongly recommend something prettier than those two butt-ugly fonts. Ehm, just to be sure: Would we have to ship these fonts in the LilyPond distribution or could we consider them present anyway? They are required fonts. Now shipping and installing fonts of our own additionally would not make a fundamental difference since we are shipping and installing our own music fonts anyway. But fonts with a reasonably complete coverage of Unicode do not exactly tend to fall from the trees and take a lot of space. Do I get this right: Setting Helvetica and Courier as default would not require us to add fonts to LilyPond's installer? If this is the case I would ask for the following: 1) Set these fonts as default. This is not sufficient from the perspective of LilyPond's aesthetics but it would stop the inacceptable state of scores compiling differently on different systems. This should be a straightforward, small patch that should be done independently from 2) (I just don't know where to start with that). 2) Find suitable fonts and include them in the distribution I know this is a more difficult issue than 1) but I think it would be worth it. By default LilyPond scores don't use sans or monospace (IISC) but I think LilyPond should actually provide beautiful defaults for these too. Maybe it would be a good start looking for fonts in the same sources as CenturySchoolbook? Urs ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Am 25.03.2015 um 10:36 schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: 2) Find suitable fonts and include them in the distribution I know this is a more difficult issue than 1) but I think it would be worth it. By default LilyPond scores don't use sans or monospace (IISC) Chord names are Sans Serif I think. A yes, that's right. And IIRC there is sort of an agreement that they are not the most appealing part of LilyPond's default appearance ... but I think LilyPond should actually provide beautiful defaults for these too. Maybe it would be a good start looking for fonts in the same sources as CenturySchoolbook? CenturySchoolbook is actually another PostScript standard font IIRC. If I'm not mistaken they are built or copied from texlive during building LilyPond. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Urs Liska writes: > 2) Find suitable fonts and include them in the distribution > I know this is a more difficult issue than 1) but I think it would be > worth it. By default LilyPond scores don't use sans or monospace > (IISC) Chord names are Sans Serif I think. > but I think LilyPond should actually provide beautiful defaults for > these too. Maybe it would be a good start looking for fonts in the > same sources as CenturySchoolbook? CenturySchoolbook is actually another PostScript standard font IIRC. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Urs Liska writes: > Am 25.03.2015 um 10:36 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> 2) Find suitable fonts and include them in the distribution >>> I know this is a more difficult issue than 1) but I think it would be >>> worth it. By default LilyPond scores don't use sans or monospace >>> (IISC) >> Chord names are Sans Serif I think. > > A yes, that's right. And IIRC there is sort of an agreement that they > are not the most appealing part of LilyPond's default appearance ... Very much so. And if that happened because Pango picks a default system font, I would not really be surprised. Different stuff is suitable for menu fonts and for music printing. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
>>> Chord names are Sans Serif I think. >> >> A yes, that's right. And IIRC there is sort of an agreement that >> they are not the most appealing part of LilyPond's default >> appearance ... > > Very much so. And if that happened because Pango picks a default > system font, I would not really be surprised. Different stuff is > suitable for menu fonts and for music printing. This is another reason for having a sans-serif font included into the lilypond distribution, IMHO. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
> So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every font > defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main focus would > be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably didn’t put so much > work in features of Latin script. > > Would you care to try a different font? TakaoPGothic is Japanese sans-serif font. It is only one sans-serif font in the system. The system doesn't have any other sans-serif fonts. I'll try to install DejaVuSans and check again. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Masamichi HOSODA writes: >> So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not >> every font defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me >> its main focus would be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers >> probably didn’t put so much work in features of Latin script. >> >> Would you care to try a different font? > > TakaoPGothic is Japanese sans-serif font. > It is only one sans-serif font in the system. > The system doesn't have any other sans-serif fonts. GhostScript should _always_ have Helvetica in some form available. I don't think we should give Pango the freedom to pick platform fonts that are not explicitly selected: that is something that may make sense for some application with a focus on interactive music display. But LilyPond targets primarily print. -- David Kastrup ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Ghostscript 9.15
>> So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every font >> defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main focus would >> be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably didn’t put so much >> work in features of Latin script. >> >> Would you care to try a different font? > > TakaoPGothic is Japanese sans-serif font. > It is only one sans-serif font in the system. > The system doesn't have any other sans-serif fonts. > > I'll try to install DejaVuSans and check again. I've checked. The result is ligatured. Lilypond select DejaVuSans as sans-serif font. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Sans-serif free Unicode font (was Re: Ghostscript 9.15)
Am 25.03.2015 um 13:32 schrieb Carl Sorensen: On 3/25/15 3:06 AM, "Urs Liska" wrote: 2) Find suitable fonts and include them in the distribution I know this is a more difficult issue than 1) but I think it would be worth it. By default LilyPond scores don't use sans or monospace (IISC) but I think LilyPond should actually provide beautiful defaults for these too. Maybe it would be a good start looking for fonts in the same sources as CenturySchoolbook? As of 2014, Google has released a free unicode sans-serif font, Carlito: http://openfontlibrary.org/en/font/carlito I don't know if it is any better than Helvetica or Arial. I don't think so. However, "better" can only be considered in terms of "visually suitable" in the context of LilyPond scores. I think the fonts we're looking for should have a similarly classic or old-fashioned look as Century. Maybe we should look for fonts that (optionally) ship with texlive. Urs Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Add means to display objects accessible from a grob (issue 217260043 by david.nales...@gmail.com)
https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/diff/1/scm/output-lib.scm File scm/output-lib.scm (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/diff/1/scm/output-lib.scm#newcode165 scm/output-lib.scm:165: (use-modules (ice-9 pretty-print)) On 2015/03/24 21:58:28, thomasmorley651 wrote: I always regretted that (ice-9 pretty-print) is not included per default. Is there any reason not to do so? Looks like all that needs to be done is to add (use-modules (ice-9 pretty-print)) to ly/init.ly Then, pretty-print is available to ly files, including within music functions. Shall I submit a patch? https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Add means to display objects accessible from a grob (issue 217260043 by david.nales...@gmail.com)
On 2015/03/25 05:35:28, ul_openlilylib.org wrote: >Well, it's not much code of course. Would it even be reloaded? >Anyway, >I wonder if "redundant" use-modules invocations should be removed, or >at >least reduced to comments. Scheme modules are loaded only once so thee is no overhead involved. > >https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/ > >___ >lilypond-devel mailing list mailto:>lilypond-devel@gnu.org >https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel OK, so I may as well leave it as-is, especially as it's not part of the Guile core. (See http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/docs/docs-1.8/guile-ref/SRFI_002d0.html#SRFI_002d0 .) https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Sans-serif free Unicode font (was Re: Ghostscript 9.15)
On 3/25/15 6:54 AM, "u...@openlilylib.org" wrote: >I think the fonts we're looking for should have a similarly classic or >old-fashioned look as Century. > >Maybe we should look for fonts that (optionally) ship with texlive. Hunting around for sans-serif fonts that work well with CenturySchoolbook, I found this: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/13598/which-sans-serif-and-monospace -fonts-suit-century-schoolbook which recommends Franklin Gothic and Helvetica. Neither one looks particularly good to me. There is a large set of Google fonts, many of which are available under the SIL Open Font License (a free license). You can see samples at http://www.google.com/fonts And filter for sans serif. I think that the following show some promise: Alegreya Sans Open Sans Marmelad Droid Sans (Apache license) Some others recommend Oswald from google fonts. Of course, I'm really bad with making font decisions, but to my eye there aren't really *any* sans-serif fonts that go well with classical engraving. Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Sans-serif free Unicode font (was Re: Ghostscript 9.15)
Am 25.03.2015 um 18:58 schrieb Carl Sorensen: On 3/25/15 6:54 AM, "u...@openlilylib.org" wrote: I think the fonts we're looking for should have a similarly classic or old-fashioned look as Century. Maybe we should look for fonts that (optionally) ship with texlive. Hunting around for sans-serif fonts that work well with CenturySchoolbook, I found this: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/13598/which-sans-serif-and-monospace -fonts-suit-century-schoolbook which recommends Franklin Gothic and Helvetica. Neither one looks particularly good to me. There is a large set of Google fonts, many of which are available under the SIL Open Font License (a free license). You can see samples at http://www.google.com/fonts And filter for sans serif. I think that the following show some promise: Alegreya Sans Open Sans Marmelad Droid Sans (Apache license) Some others recommend Oswald from google fonts. Of course, I'm really bad with making font decisions, but to my eye there aren't really *any* sans-serif fonts that go well with classical engraving. +1 Is there any recommendation whether to use sans serif fonts for chord names? I used the text font (serif) in the latest projects of mine where chord symbols were needed. Marc Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Sans-serif free Unicode font (was Re: Ghostscript 9.15)
On 03/25/2015 06:58 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote: On 3/25/15 6:54 AM, "u...@openlilylib.org" wrote: I think the fonts we're looking for should have a similarly classic or old-fashioned look as Century. Maybe we should look for fonts that (optionally) ship with texlive. [...] I think that the following show some promise: Alegreya Sans +1. The entire Alegreya family (also the serif) is beautiful, is not too wasteful with horizontal space, and comes with a large set of variants (including proper small capitals). I like it a lot in scores. Another font I used is Optima. It's almost overused, it's not a strict sans-serif in my opinion, because the varying widths of the strokes give the impression "fake" serifs to some degree, but it's beautiful. And with MgOpen Cosmetica, URW Classico (one of GS default fonts) and Linux Biolinum, there are a number of high-quality free siblings. W.r.t. a monospace font, the M+ font collection comes to my mind. It has some nice families which look good in print, too. It's a large collection, but e.g. M+1m or M+2m should be enough. (Although the latter has a pretty unique character with it's g glyph; not sure if that fits overall.) Just my 2 pence, Alexander ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Fix issue 4040: Dots ignoring shifted ledger lines (issue 220090043 by paulwmor...@gmail.com)
Patch on countdown for March 28th https://codereview.appspot.com/220090043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
PATCHES: Countdown for March 28th 2015
Hello, Here is the current patch countdown list. The next countdown will be on March 28th. You can always view the most current countdown list here: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?q=Patch%3Apush%2Ccountdown%2Creview%2Cnew%2Cwaiting&colspec=Patch%20Owner%20ID%20Summary&sort=patch PUSH: Urs Liska: Patch: web: productions: Update Aurélien's Rosenkavalier http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4327 James Lowe: Patch: Web: Introduction.itexi - updated 'Productions' http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4322 COUNTDOWN: David Nalesnik: Patch: Add means to display objects accessible from a grob http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4328 James Lowe: Dots ignoring shifted ledger lines http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=4040 WAITING: Urs Liska: Patch: Issue 3916: Add \alternatingTimeSignatures http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3918 Mike Solomon: Patch: Prevents vertical axis groups with empty skylines http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3156 Mike Solomon: Patch: Removes the translate_axis call from axis-group-interface outside-staff positioning. http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3134 David Kastrup: Patch: Implement music functions in Scheme rather than C++ http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2716 Thank you, James ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Sans-serif free Unicode font (was Re: Ghostscript 9.15)
Am 25.03.2015 um 18:58 schrieb Carl Sorensen: On 3/25/15 6:54 AM, "u...@openlilylib.org" wrote: I think the fonts we're looking for should have a similarly classic or old-fashioned look as Century. Maybe we should look for fonts that (optionally) ship with texlive. Hunting around for sans-serif fonts that work well with CenturySchoolbook, I found this: http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/13598/which-sans-serif-and-monospace -fonts-suit-century-schoolbook which recommends Franklin Gothic and Helvetica. Neither one looks particularly good to me. I think so too. But Franklin Gothic was a font I looked at for a longer time earlier today ... Of course the question is always to find a font that is - free - good quality - well equipped with multilingual characters (- ideally it would also have a number of widths and weights) There is a large set of Google fonts, many of which are available under the SIL Open Font License (a free license). You can see samples at http://www.google.com/fonts And filter for sans serif. OK. IISC these are web fonts but there are .otf files available in the repository. I think that the following show some promise: Alegreya Sans Open Sans Marmelad Droid Sans (Apache license) Some others recommend Oswald from google fonts. Of course, I'm really bad with making font decisions, but to my eye there aren't really *any* sans-serif fonts that go well with classical engraving. Yes, I have this impression too. I have seen contemporary scores make use of some rather stylized sans fonts - but that's something that can already been done, so nothing we should consider making the default. It turned out that I recalled correctly that U.E. made use of sans-serif fonts in their titlings sometimes: http://imslp.org/wiki/Variations_for_Piano,_Op.27_(Webern,_Anton) http://imslp.org/wiki/4_Lieder,_Op.12_(Webern,_Anton) http://imslp.org/wiki/Special:ImagefromIndex/313889 In general I wouldn't suggest using sans-serif fonts in score documents if it isn't for some special style ideas. But these aren't the target of a default font. But we do have to ensure that the output of a (default) compilation doesn't depend on the availability of certain fonts on the user's system or on his settings. So we should find a good complement to Century, which isn't too easy. It is so much about the pairing. I have a pair of fonts that I use all the time: Minion and Cronos, and I like that very much. But of course they are commercial fonts, and they look more modern than the default LilyPond appearance. Another quite nice combination (IMHO) is Linux Libertine and Linux Biolinum, but that doesn't fit too well with Century either. I think most fonts on Googlefonts are too "modern" by intention. What I have in mind would probably be close to the old sans fonts like Franklin Gothic or Akzidenz Grotesk. Urs Carl ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Re: Add means to display objects accessible from a grob (issue 217260043 by david.nales...@gmail.com)
LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/217260043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
