Re: Issue 471 in lilypond: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here

2011-07-22 Thread lilypond
Comment #3 on issue 471 by reinhold...@gmail.com: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=471 The problem is the second staff, which starts right after the line break. This means that the key signature setting for the low

Re: Issue 471 in lilypond: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here

2009-11-12 Thread lilypond
Comment #2 on issue 471 by percival.music.ca: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=471 Great example of the badness of having no attached png! :( I _think_ the problem is the very right-hand side of the staff. In curr

Re: Issue 471 in lilypond: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here

2009-11-12 Thread lilypond
Updates: Owner: percival.music.ca Comment #1 on issue 471 by reinhold.kainhofer: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=471 In 2.12 and 2.13.7, I can't see any different with and without the \once\set... What's

Issue 471 in lilypond: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here

2007-09-14 Thread codesite-noreply
Issue 471: explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary here http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=471 New issue report by gpermus: %{ The setting of Staff.explicitKeySignatureVisibility shouldn't be necessary in the following example: %} \version "2.11.32" \score { \new S