Latest patches update as suggested The build section has a link to
4.6.2 and I've slightly tweaked the language of the latter section as
well as mentioning the doc-stage-1 build option.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/
___
lilypond-devel mailin
It would be useful if there were a few people interested in
helping prepare discussions for GOP and GLISS. This would involve
a number of 1-3 hour research+writing tasks.
Typical examples of this work are:
- "read this 3000-word document and summarize the 10 bullet points
that apply to us",
- "
Count me in!
Cheers,
MS
On 30 mai 2012, at 14:39, Graham Percival wrote:
> It would be useful if there were a few people interested in
> helping prepare discussions for GOP and GLISS. This would involve
> a number of 1-3 hour research+writing tasks.
>
> Typical examples of this work are:
> - "
Hi Graham,
This is something I can [finally] commit to doing!! =)
I'm swamped for the next two weeks, but if you can use me after June 15, count
me in.
Best,
Kieren.
> It would be useful if there were a few people interested in
> helping prepare discussions for GOP and GLISS. This would invol
16:28:01 Begin LilyPond compile, commit:
bd3c92cbe6edabb9a006ff76290012aa8f8ed13a
16:28:13 *** FAILED STEP ***
merge from staging
maybe somebody pushed a commit directly to master?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-deve
Le 29/05/2012 23:11, Graham Percival disait :
Friendly reminder -- since there are no Type-Critical issues
either open or in the "issues to verify", 2.15.39 is aimed to
become 2.16.0 in one week.
If you do not think that this is appropriate, then take
appropriate action in the issue tracker. Do
Le 30/05/2012 18:37, Jean-Charles Malahieude disait :
Do you plan to build a last 2.15.40 for the po files to be in sync,
or should I make a new pot and upload a new tarball (2.15.39-1) anywhere
for the FTP?
Unless you plan a 2.16.1 very fast.
ps: including the work made by David on footnotes.
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 06:37:48PM +0200, Jean-Charles Malahieude wrote:
> Le 29/05/2012 23:11, Graham Percival disait :
> >Friendly reminder -- since there are no Type-Critical issues
> >either open or in the "issues to verify", 2.15.39 is aimed to
> >become 2.16.0 in one week.
>
> Do you plan to
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/diff/6001/Documentation/included/compile.itexi
File Documentation/included/compile.itexi (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/diff/6001/Documentation/included/compile.itexi#newcode646
Documentation/included/compile.itexi:646: easily take an hour
LGTM, and I like the regtests.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6255056/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:39 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> It would be useful if there were a few people interested in
> helping prepare discussions for GOP and GLISS. This would involve
> a number of 1-3 hour research+writing tasks.
I'm in for GLISS things (all of them!), but i cannot start befo
On Tue, 29 May 2012, Colin Campbell wrote:
> On 12-05-29 06:02 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> >The following patch fixes an issue which keeps lilypond from building
> >properly on GCC 4.7. [It's also almost certainly a bug in addition to
> >this.]
[...]
> Don, would you have a look at our outstandin
On 2012/05/30 16:55:17, Graham Percival wrote:
I'm not convinced that the added text will help. How about instead
you change
it to
... done :-)
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https:/
> On 12-05-29 06:02 PM, Don Armstrong wrote:
> > The following patch fixes an issue which keeps lilypond from building
> > properly on GCC 4.7. [It's also almost certainly a bug in addition to
> > this.]
This was
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2089
and is now fixed.
___
ok. The @warning{} suggestion was aimed at making it much more visible,
but if you think it's visible enough as-is then I'm not going to
complain -- if we use too many @warning{}s then they'll lose their
effectiveness.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/
On 2012/05/30 21:16:09, Graham Percival wrote:
The @warning{}
... I'm blind. Give me 2 seconds to fix that.
https://codereview.appspot.com/6206071/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypo
oh, and since you didn't use our custom git-cl to upload this patch,
you'll need to manually change the relevant issue to patch-new, or else
this will never get pushed.
It would be nice if we had a dedicated mentor for you, but unfortunately
we don't so this warning is the best we can do for you.
I have always been using git-cl but for all patches after the first I
got an error message after entering the google tracker issue number:
---
We were not able to associate this patch with a google tracker issue.
Please enter a valid google tracker issue number (or enter nothing to
create a n
joseph.wakel...@gmail.com writes:
> I have always been using git-cl but for all patches after the first I
> got an error message after entering the google tracker issue number:
>
> ---
> We were not able to associate this patch with a google tracker issue.
> Please enter a valid google tracker
[copy of message posted to devel list]
On 2012/05/30 21:45:58, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
Please enter a valid google tracker issue number (or enter nothing to
create a
new issue): 6206071
That's not the Google tracker issue number, but the Rietveld issue
number.
The Google tracker num
20 matches
Mail list logo
