Re: git uncleaned history

2008-09-04 Thread till Rettig
Hi, thanks for this comprehensive list! Many things are now also clearer to me! Original-Nachricht Datum: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 01:08:53 +0200 Von: Reinhold Kainhofer [EMAIL PROTECTED] An: Jean-Charles Malahieude [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: lilypond-devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org

Re: Local doc building with texi2html

2008-09-04 Thread Patrick McCarty
Hi John, On Wed, Sep 03, 2008 at 11:31:58PM +0200, John Mandereau wrote: Strange... There is link rel=stylesheet in all HTML pages generated by texi2html in my build. Does anything look strange in make web output? You can do find -wholename '*out-www/*.html' -delete make out=www WWW-2

Re: git uncleaned history

2008-09-04 Thread Trevor Daniels
Just to add a couple of points to this which may be helpful to some. Creating new branches is easy and does not have a high overhead. I usually have several on the go, one for each self-contained change or set of changes currently under development. This permits several commits to be under

Re: Local doc building with texi2html

2008-09-04 Thread Patrick McCarty
On Thu, Sep 04, 2008 at 12:38:08AM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote: Since an example with CSS_LINES is described, and this variable is used in the init file, I figured this might be relevant. Regardless, it's clear that my problem was due to an upstream change. Well, it seems this is a pretty

shorthand for autoBeam control

2008-09-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
I'm not sure whether this has been discussed before: What do you think of using `c[]' as a shorthand for `\autoBeamOff c \autoBeamOn'? Currently, `c[]' produces _ | | O (a note with a beamlet to the left and right), which is neither

Re: shorthand for autoBeam control

2008-09-04 Thread Mats Bengtsson
We already have the predefined macro \noBeam. Do we really need yet another more or less obscure special case of the syntax? /Mats Werner LEMBERG wrote: I'm not sure whether this has been discussed before: What do you think of using `c[]' as a shorthand for `\autoBeamOff c \autoBeamOn'?

Re: git uncleaned history

2008-09-04 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, till Rettig wrote: - -) git checkout filename -- discards all non-committed changes to the file. I thought that works only if you remove the file before? No, it works also with dirty files, i.e. files that have been modified, but not committed. The only

Re: a couple of bugs with lyrics

2008-09-04 Thread Neil Puttock
Hi Werner, 2008/9/2 Werner LEMBERG [EMAIL PROTECTED]: 1. I'm replacing hara-kiri with axis-group; however, whatever I do, there is no (empty) lyrics line in the first system. This appears to be the same issue affecting the piano centred dynamics template when there's a system with no

Re: shorthand for autoBeam control

2008-09-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
We already have the predefined macro \noBeam. Ah, I wasn't aware of that! I overlooked it in the docs. Do we really need yet another more or less obscure special case of the syntax? No. Werner ___ lilypond-devel mailing list

Re: git uncleaned history

2008-09-04 Thread Johannes Schindelin
Hi, On Thu, 4 Sep 2008, Till Rettig wrote: Johannes Schindelin schrieb: You mean git reset --hard? That resets _all_ files. _And_ the staging area. Guess I meant that one -- I had sometimes problems with wrong commits that I didn't get reset somehow. As I understand, if I do a commit

Re: a couple of bugs with lyrics

2008-09-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
1. I'm replacing hara-kiri with axis-group; however, whatever I do, there is no (empty) lyrics line in the first system. This appears to be the same issue affecting the piano centred dynamics template when there's a system with no dynamics. Ok. Is this classified as a bug or as a

Re: shorthand for autoBeam control

2008-09-04 Thread Jay Anderson
Mats Bengtsson mats.bengtsson at ee.kth.se writes: We already have the predefined macro \noBeam. Do we really need yet another more or less obscure special case of the syntax? /Mats Werner LEMBERG wrote: I'm not sure whether this has been discussed before: What do you think of

Re: shorthand for autoBeam control

2008-09-04 Thread Werner LEMBERG
I'm not sure whether this has been discussed before: What do you think of using `c[]' as a shorthand for `\autoBeamOff c \autoBeamOn'? When I was first learning lilypond I remember trying this exact syntax to get an unbeamed note. I think it would be useful if it worked. It's a big win