On Mon, 2011-02-07 at 00:26 +0100, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
Am Sonntag, 6. Februar 2011, um 23:58:20 schrieb Graham Percival:
There's five questions in my mind.
1) should we reject a patch which does not have complete
documention? (IMNSHO: no)
I would word it differently:
We
Am Sonntag, 6. Februar 2011, um 23:58:20 schrieb Graham Percival:
There's five questions in my mind.
1) should we reject a patch which does not have complete
documention? (IMNSHO: no)
I would word it differently:
We encourage (although not absolutely require) each developer to write basic
Reinhold Kainhofer wrote Sunday, February 06, 2011 10:41 PM
Another aspect to consider is that the developer bestk knows what
a new feature is about and how and in which musical context to use
it.
A doc writer, on thze other hand might not have any idea where the
feature can be used (because
On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 11:41:13PM +0100, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
This has been raised a few times, and will be discussed in GOP. At the
moment,
- undoc'd new features do not block a stable release
- we can see alterations to regtests with diff, and therefore figure out
what's new
Comment #8 on issue 1463 by percival.music.ca: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
This has been raised a few times, and will be discussed in GOP. At the
moment,
- undoc'd new features do not block a stable release
- we can see alterations to regtests with diff, and therefore figure out
Updates:
Status: Verified
Comment #9 on issue 1463 by colinpkc...@gmail.com: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
(No comment was entered for this change.)
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
Comment #7 on issue 1463 by mats.ben...@s3.kth.se: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Sorry to jump in, but I didn't see any documentation of this new feature in
the patch. A new feature without documentation is a non-existing feature,
Comment #8 on issue 1463 by percival.music.ca: Writing metadata to the PDF
file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
This has been raised a few times, and will be discussed in GOP. At the
moment,
- undoc'd new features do not block a stable release
- we can see
Updates:
Labels: fixed_2_13_48
Comment #5 on issue 1463 by pnorcks: Writing metadata to the PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Reinhold addressed comment 4 with commit
b3a8ed98c69b8fd60e854078a8440ddc0a9b1f0b.
The bug squad can verify this for 2.13.48.
Comment #6 on issue 1463 by colinpkc...@gmail.com: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
tested with today's build of 2.13.48, verified the keywords in the .pdf by
using Okular to display properties.
Updates:
Status: Fixed
Comment #3 on issue 1463 by reinhold...@gmail.com: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Pushed with commit eab591fe423ef0eeb03d8bbedf7d43185d2fbc74
___
Comment #4 on issue 1463 by n.putt...@gmail.com: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Reinhold, this patch breaks files which don't have a header block. You
need to validate the existence of the header before calling
`handle-metadata',
Updates:
Owner: reinhold.kainhofer
Labels: Patch-new
Comment #1 on issue 1463 by reinhold...@gmail.com: Writing metadata to the
PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Patch is up for review at:
http://codereview.appspot.com/4094045/
Updates:
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-review
Comment #2 on issue 1463 by percival.music.ca: Writing metadata to the PDF
file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Nothing obviously wrong.
___
bug-lilypond mailing list
Status: Accepted
Owner:
Labels: Type-Enhancement Priority-Medium
New issue 1463 by brownian.box: Writing metadata to the PDF file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1463
Reported by Reinhold Kainhofer,
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2010-12/msg00382.html :
15 matches
Mail list logo