Re: 2.17.6: assertion failed with \glissando

>> Werner Lemberg reported an assertion failure on his own build of >> 2.17.6 here: >> >> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-lilypond/2012-11/msg00047.html > > Werner, if this is reproducible it will need a tracker and patch and > everything to go through the review process. (I realize you > p

PATCH: Countdown to 20121129

For 20:00 MST Thursday November 29 Documentation: Issue 2980 : LM doc files in language subdirectories are incomplete and Issue 2967 : @unnumberedsubsubsec should always have

Re: Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit (issue 6851102)

On 2012/11/26 21:53:09, Trevor Daniels wrote: I think you've chosen the best way forward here. Calling a strategic retreat "the best way forward" might be putting a bit of a spin on it. It would have been prohibitively costly for the ground forces to secure the conquered areas. http://codere

Re: Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit (issue 6851102)

On 2012/11/26 10:03:27, dak wrote: I agree that the effect that this has here is not really harmonizing well with \override (which does not allow a context spec inside of context mods, and will not silently ignore Bottom overrides in non-Bottom contexts), so it might make sense to just dro

Re: markup-commands rest-by-number and rest (issue 6850073)

On 2012/11/26 15:09:58, benko.pal wrote: > So I'd suggest not treating the '-' at all (to make things not more > confusing than they already are) and letting the font backend sort > things out. I concur. Ok, I'll try. http://codereview.appspot.com/6850073/diff/6004/scm/define-markup-comman

Re: markup-commands rest-by-number and rest (issue 6850073)

So I'd suggest not treating the '-' at all (to make things not more confusing than they already are) and letting the font backend sort things out. I concur. http://codereview.appspot.com/6850073/diff/6004/scm/define-markup-commands.scm File scm/define-markup-commands.scm (right): http://coder

Re: markup-commands rest-by-number and rest (issue 6850073)

On 2012/11/26 11:51:03, dak wrote: On 2012/11/26 11:37:26, benko.pal wrote: > I just meant that instead of checking several times whether dealing with > multi-measure rest or not, you may convert duration log at a single place (with > the caveat of turning a negative sign to 'M' instead of

Re: markup-commands rest-by-number and rest (issue 6850073)

On 2012/11/26 11:37:26, benko.pal wrote: I just meant that instead of checking several times whether dealing with multi-measure rest or not, you may convert duration log at a single place (with the caveat of turning a negative sign to 'M' instead of '-'). Probably even without the caveat.

Re: markup-commands rest-by-number and rest (issue 6850073)

On 2012/11/25 23:03:43, thomasmorley65 wrote: On 2012/11/21 08:05:09, benko.pal wrote: [...] > there are no separate glyphs for rests and multi measure rests: the M in glyph > names stands not for MultiMeasure, but for Minus. Didn't know that. > that makes for rewriting the > cond below,

Re: Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit (issue 6851102)

Reviewers: Trevor Daniels, thomasmorley65, http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102/diff/3001/Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely File Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102/diff/3001/Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely#newcode1499 Documentation/learning

Re: Fix for issue 2967 [was Re: Your Patches]

Hello, On 25 November 2012 22:43, Trevor Daniels wrote: > > Francisco Vila wrote Sunday, November 25, 2012 5:15 PM > >> 2012/11/25 Trevor Daniels : >> --snip-- WARNING: Unable to find node 'Creating titles' in book notation. *** Undefined node `Single staff' in @ref (in out-ww

Re: Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit (issue 6851102)

http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102/diff/3001/Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely File Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102/diff/3001/Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely#newcode1499 Documentation/learning/tweaks.itely:1499: \omit Staff.Clef That's