Graham Percival writes:
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 01:40:36AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Graham Percival writes:
>>
>> >> I am talking about bugs without a fix. Sometimes they disappear as a
>> >> sideeffect of fixing a different bug, or restructuring code.
>> >
>> > I think the issue track
Looks great. At the moment, there's some huge space between the code
and the example -- but that's due to texi2pdf spacing things out. If I
remove the second example, then the space is right.
(think about ragged-bottom and ragged-last in lilypond)
Please push.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4
not tested, but go ahead and push. I think that for stuff this simple,
you can skip the rietveld step.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4385047/diff/1/input/regression/quote-during.ly
File input/regression/quote-during.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4385047/diff/1/input/regression/quot
Reviewers: ,
Description:
Modifies quote.ly and quote-during.ly to revert to their original
behavior.
Beam collision avoidance now causes stems to elongate to avoid
collisions.
To reinstate the collisions, the collision-voice-only property has been
set to ##t.
Please review this at http://coder
On Apr 6, 2011, at 9:55 AM, hanw...@gmail.com wrote:
> LGTM
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4337045/diff/18002/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc
> File lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc (right):
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4337045/diff/18002/lily/beam-collision-engraver.cc#newcode108
> li
On Sat, Apr 09, 2011 at 01:40:36AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> >> I am talking about bugs without a fix. Sometimes they disappear as a
> >> sideeffect of fixing a different bug, or restructuring code.
> >
> > I think the issue tracker is the best place for that. It
Here's the current patches list:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch&sort=patch
Please let me know if:
- you have a patch which is not on the list
- you think that your patch should be reviewed by others but it's not
in the "patch-review" section
Cheers,
- Graham
__
hello
.
On 8 Apr 2011, at 22:36, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 05:24:28PM -0400, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
>> I got this when I tried to run git pull.
>>
>> Any ideas for what to do?
>
> Your account is still listed here:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/users/mikesol
>
> ..
Graham Percival writes:
> On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 06:06:09PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>>
>> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> >> do we just want regression tests for things that _do_ work currently,
>> >> or is it ok to add tests for thin
On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 06:06:09PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> do we just want regression tests for things that _do_ work currently,
> >> or is it ok to add tests for things that _should_ work but don't,
http://codereview.appspot.com/4388041/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely
File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4388041/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode3240
Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:3240: length of the preced
Nearly there :)
http://codereview.appspot.com/4388041/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely
File Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4388041/diff/4001/Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely#newcode3240
Documentation/notation/rhythms.itely:3240: len
On Fri, Apr 08, 2011 at 05:24:28PM -0400, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> I got this when I tried to run git pull.
>
> Any ideas for what to do?
Your account is still listed here:
http://savannah.gnu.org/users/mikesol
... wait, I'm getting the same message. well, webgit is still up
but:
http://s
LGTM, just needs a regtest.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4384046/diff/5001/lily/page-spacing.cc
File lily/page-spacing.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4384046/diff/5001/lily/page-spacing.cc#newcode88
lily/page-spacing.cc:88: return footnote_height
(footnote_height
to preserve indent
I got this when I tried to run git pull.
Any ideas for what to do?
Cheers,
MS
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
New patch set uploaded.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/diff/1/input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly
File input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/diff/1/input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly#newcode1
input/regression/bea
http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/diff/1/input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly
File input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/diff/1/input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly#newcode1
input/regression/beam-collision-voice-only.ly
Thanks, done.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4368049/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, Trevor Daniels,
Message:
On 2011/04/07 22:31:25, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Suggested rewording, accommodating Carl's suggestion.
Otherwise, looks fine.
I did what was suggested and then re-worded that.
So it's 'done' but not exactly as suggested. I think t
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> do we just want regression tests for things that _do_ work currently,
>> or is it ok to add tests for things that _should_ work but don't, as
>> long as the test does not bomb out?
>
> I think adding things that
On Apr 8, 2011, at 3:44 AM, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 2011/04/08 07:35:06, Graham Percival wrote:
>> This patch appears to break partcombine-midi.ly, but since that's a
> very new
>> part of the regtests, I'm not totally confident that this isn't just a
> random
>> fluctuation in mid
On Apr 7, 2011, at 11:34 PM, percival.music...@gmail.com wrote:
> thanks, added here:
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1600
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4367042/
>
> ___
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> lilypond-devel@gnu.org
>
Nice ! (and quick)
Thanks :o)
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
commit a4668131900363364bb2454700c40183cedf4c9b
Author: Han-Wen Nienhuys
Date: Fri Apr 8 11:19:06 2011 -0300
Divide collision Y extent by staff_space; add regression test.
This makes collisions work correctly in scaled staves.
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 8:47 AM, Bertrand Bordage
wrote:
On Fri, Apr 8, 2011 at 11:01 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> do we just want regression tests for things that _do_ work currently, or
> is it ok to add tests for things that _should_ work but don't, as long
> as the test does not bomb out?
I think adding things that don't work is not a good idea; it w
Hi,
do we just want regression tests for things that _do_ work currently, or
is it ok to add tests for things that _should_ work but don't, as long
as the test does not bomb out?
In other words: is it ok to commit tests for currently wrong typesetting
decisions independently to input/regression
> Which version of 2.13 are you using?
2.13.59
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
2011/4/7 :
> Sorry about the confusion on documentation -- I misread the initial
> version. Yes, even though the current version is incorrect, let's just
> go with it anyway.
>
> (really, adding new features and writing documentation about them are
> completely different things; there's no point
On Apr 8, 2011, at 6:41 AM, Bertrand Bordage wrote:
> Hello,
>
> When we use a smaller staff, Beam_collision_engraver creates collisions that
> where not in 2.12.
>
> \version "2.13"
> music = << \relative c'' { e16 f e c } \\ \relative c''' { g a g e } >>
>
> \new Staff \music
> \new Staff \w
Reviewers: Graham Percival, hanwenn,
Message:
Neil sent an alternative out to lilypond-devel on March 26th with his
own patch. It seems to be better than this one. Neil - can you please
throw it up on Rietveld?
Cheers,
Mike
Description:
Fix candidate for 1506
Please review this at http://cod
On 2011/04/08 07:35:06, Graham Percival wrote:
This patch appears to break partcombine-midi.ly, but since that's a
very new
part of the regtests, I'm not totally confident that this isn't just a
random
fluctuation in midi2ly.
Never mind; I removed your patch, built a new regtest comparison,
Pushed
4133b4e0ec939a427a70361ad838c65a84a0dfda
http://codereview.appspot.com/4323045/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
This patch appears to break partcombine-midi.ly, but since that's a very
new part of the regtests, I'm not totally confident that this isn't just
a random fluctuation in midi2ly.
Do you see the same behaviour when running a regtest comparison? This
is the first regtest comparison I've done since
34 matches
Mail list logo
