Has anyone looked at these differences in note placement? Were they
deliberate? If they're not, then they'd have to count as a regression.
--
Phil Holmes
Bug Squad
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailm
Mark,
)-Original Message-
)From: Mark Polesky [mailto:markpole...@yahoo.com]
)Sent: 01 April 2011 07:04
)To: 'lilypond-devel@gnu.org'; James Lowe
)Subject: Re: Clarification for \null in \header markups
)
)James Lowe wrote:
)> I am making a patch for some updates for Titles and Headers and
I'm not sure what good default behavior would be for:
{1 ~ \break 1 }
but it seems that the tie for a-natural should either be killed or made
slightly longer.
It prints fine w/o the accidental on the f:
{1 ~ \break 1 }
Thoughts?
Cheers,
MS
___
lily
On Fri 01 Apr 2011, 08:45 m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> I'm not sure what good default behavior would be for:
>
> {1 ~ \break 1 }
I guess it (the tie) should be a bit longer, see 1219:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1219
> but it seems that the tie for a-natural should eithe
On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 09:17:10AM +0100, Phil Holmes wrote:
> Has anyone looked at these differences in note placement? Were they
> deliberate? If they're not, then they'd have to count as a
> regression.
I glanced at it initially and saw nothing bad, but when there's
animation as well, it real
What happened to
input/regression/staccato-pos.ly
input/regression/beam-multiple-cross-staff.ly
? it looks like those are currently broken, and this patch fixes it?
Is this just my system acting weird, or did we really miss two broken
regtests earlier?
oh wait, the beam-multiple- regtest has
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 12:50:07PM +, James Lowe wrote:
> That's OK, we can still do this with 'proper' paper sizes with
> internationally defined names rather than our own custom ones.
>
> For example, we could define some 'C' sizes which are used for
> defining envelopes, are as internationa
Graham,
)-Original Message-
)From: Graham Percival [mailto:gra...@percival-music.ca]
)Sent: 01 April 2011 16:27
)To: James Lowe
)Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
)Subject: Re: landscape mode vs. new paper size
)
)On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 12:50:07PM +, James Lowe wrote:
)> That's OK, we can st
LGTM, I can confirm the clean regtests.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4313047/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
James Lowe wrote:
> Don't worry, I've been on it, I didn't want to see this
> work go to waste as the patch became stale. So I've edited
> your work and created a new patch
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/
>
> and this is the latest iteration of your patch.
This is so freakin' awesome.
Patch listed.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4337045/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Patch listed.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4323045/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Patch listed.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4313047/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
I've just pushed another edit to the website build system notes.
As far as I know, it's now a complete description.
Could you two take a look at it, and identify any gaps?
I think the first step to rationalizing the whole thing is to
really understand how the website works, then simplify that as
On 2011/04/01 16:54:14, lilypond.patches wrote:
Patch listed.
Personally, I think that an association with some respective higher
context (aka inheritance) is such a common type of operation that we
should rather try thinking about how to provide a general mechanism for
this kind of thing rathe
15 matches
Mail list logo
