Graham Percival wrote Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:30 PM
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Trevor Daniels
wrote:
2.1.8 Opera and stage musicals ready for review
Err... 2.1.6 in today's current git? ok, doing so. I've
forgotten
anything else we've discussed about 2.1 vocal music, which
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:03 PM, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Graham Percival wrote Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:36 PM
>
>> Does anybody deal with lilypond source code on windows itself, instead
>> of lilybuntu? Trevor?
>
> I do _all_ my doc work on Windows, with a Windows
> git repository.
Ok, t
Graham Percival wrote Saturday, September 11, 2010 8:36 PM
Does anybody deal with lilypond source code on windows itself,
instead
of lilybuntu? Trevor?
I do _all_ my doc work on Windows, with a Windows
git repository. I have ubuntu available in a
VM, but it causes a significant slow-down
Does anybody deal with lilypond source code on windows itself, instead
of lilybuntu? Trevor?
I'm looking at CG 2, and I'm not certain it makes sense to keep the
"git on windows" stuff. If somebody can't build lilypond, then the
source code is of limited use, and lilybuntu seems to be working wel
On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 9:08 AM, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> 2.1.8 Opera and stage musicals ready for review
Err... 2.1.6 in today's current git? ok, doing so. I've forgotten
anything else we've discussed about 2.1 vocal music, which may or may
not be a good idea for this doc review.
- I see sig
On 9/11/10 5:47 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> On 9/10/10 2:17 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>>
>> But somehow I lost it. I'm sorry about breaking the doc build. It's fixed
>> now and pushed to git.
>
> Don't worry about it; these
On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 9/10/10 2:17 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
> But somehow I lost it. I'm sorry about breaking the doc build. It's fixed
> now and pushed to git.
Don't worry about it; these things happen. We can use it as a nice
story for frogs -- "s
On 2010/09/11 07:02:55, perpeduumimmobile wrote:
Wouldn't it be easier to just say
- if a line belongs to a preprocessor statement
(i.e. it either starts with "#" or
each of the lines before end with "\", and the first line
of those starts with "#")
then leave it alone (dont
Trevor Daniels Thursday, August 26, 2010 10:41 PM
Trevor Daniels wrote Thursday, August 19, 2010 6:40 PM
I've finished and pushed the first pass through 2.1.7 Choral.
I'll begin work on 2.1.9 Chants hymns and psalms next.
First pass through 2.1.9 Chants etc done.
I'll look at 2.1.8 Opera
On 2010/09/10 19:46:57, Graham Percival wrote:
a python guru / regex person [...]
That's not me...
(from the issue description)
- Given a "define blah {" line, we *don't* want to move the { to
the next line.
- given a:
=
include "foo.h"
;
don't move the include onto the
10 matches
Mail list logo
