Reviewers: Keith,
Message:
Keith's additions. Thank you.
https://codereview.appspot.com/44420043/diff/1/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely
File Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely (right):
On 2013/12/22 07:01:10, Keith wrote:
On Sat, 21 Dec 2013 00:23:05 -0800, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
Keith comments:
The other limitation of \unfoldRepeats is that it fails to see
repeats
in
parallel expressions {\repeat volta 2 s1 } {c2 d2} while this
approach
using the iterators
Hello
*Countdown – December 25th – 06:00 GMT* *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
3730
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
Git and patch review.
First:
3.2.2 Git for the impatient and
3.3 Basic Git procedures
share some information, and this in a somewhat confusing way.
Is there a _short_ explanation what these two chapters are intended for?
Urs, you wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:55 AM
Subject: CG organization (Git)
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
Git and patch review.
The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
many sections added without considering the effect on
Am 22.12.2013 10:29, schrieb Trevor Daniels:
Urs, you wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 8:55 AM
Subject: CG organization (Git)
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters about
Git and patch review.
The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
many
Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch.
I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code.
make doc gave an error, but this pointed to
fatal error: failed files: 60/lily-338514d2.ly
so I think I can ignore this?
Urs
Original-Nachricht
Betreff:
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes:
Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch.
I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code.
make doc gave an error, but this pointed to
fatal error: failed files: 60/lily-338514d2.ly
so I think I can ignore this?
Am 22.12.2013 10:54, schrieb David Kastrup:
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes:
Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch.
I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code.
make doc gave an error, but this pointed to
fatal error: failed files:
Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org writes:
Am 22.12.2013 10:54, schrieb David Kastrup:
I see that you used @code{vi} and @code{git-cl} rather than @command{vi}
and @command{git-cl}: any particular reason for that?
I was suggested to use that on Rietveld.
So, no, no particular reason.
Yes, I
Urs Liska wrote Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:40 AM
Am 22.12.2013 10:29, schrieb Trevor Daniels:
The CG has never been properly revised and reorganised, with
many sections added without considering the effect on others.
But I'm still more confused because this contradicts
After a good
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 09:55:39AM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
I'm somewhat confused about the organization of the CG chapters
about Git and patch review.
First:
3.2.2 Git for the impatient and
3.3 Basic Git procedures
share some information, and this in a somewhat confusing way.
Is there a
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 10:40:04AM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
After a good deal of thinking, here's how i think CG should be
structured.
More thinking and discussion than we had the previous 4 times we
reorganized the CG?
from a week ago.
Chapters 1 and 2 are solid (other than the bits
LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/42770043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
LGTM
https://codereview.appspot.com/0043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Original-Nachricht
Betreff: Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment
about git-cl editor
Datum: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 13:13:54 +0100
Von: Urs Liska u...@openlilylib.org
An: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
Am 22.12.2013 11:59, schrieb Urs Liska:
I don't see that
Unfolding during iteration doesn't extend well to voltas, because it
changes their length. Even if the length is updated, the old length
has already been used by the parent iterator to compute moments for
subsequent events. So unless this can be changed, unfolding will have
to be done earlier, on
Hi,
got a short moment for lily mail...
Devon - all these are valid concerns. However, i advise not to try
doing too much at once - let's do one level of abstraction at a time.
best,
Janek
2013/12/20 Devon Schudy dsch...@gmail.com:
Janek Warchoł wrote:
I believe we need to add an
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:45:49 -0800, Devon Schudy dsch...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfolding during iteration doesn't extend well to voltas, because it
changes their length. Even if the length is updated, the old length
has already been used by the parent iterator to compute moments for
subsequent
On 2013/12/22 22:01:25, Keith wrote:
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:45:49 -0800, Devon Schudy
mailto:dsch...@gmail.com wrote:
Unfolding during iteration doesn't extend well to voltas, because it
changes their length. Even if the length is updated, the old length
has already been used by the parent
Fails make need to escape some braces here and there in the @examples -
some nits.
https://codereview.appspot.com/45070043/diff/1/Documentation/web/news-front.itexi
File Documentation/web/news-front.itexi (right):
Reviewers: J_lowe,
Message:
On 2013/12/22 23:03:46, J_lowe wrote:
Fails make need to escape some braces here and there in the @examples
- some
nits.
Embarrassing. I did not bother all too much about seeing Patchy
complain since I was not expecting a patch to the stable branch to apply
at
I wrote:
I was imagining it. [...] it never actually says it *can't* be
explicitly created.
It's in engraver-init.ly: “You cannot explicitly instantiate a
@code{Score} context”.
David Kastrup wrote:
Doing start_translation_timestep in mid-timestep is unclean, though,
and may confuse
Janek Warchoł wrote:
Devon - all these are valid concerns. However, i advise not to try
doing too much at once - let's do one level of abstraction at a time.
Yeah. That was a wishlist, not a list of things needed for the SATB
framework. :)
I hope the predefined staff contexts do get into
https://codereview.appspot.com/45070043/diff/20001/Documentation/web/news-front.itexi
File Documentation/web/news-front.itexi (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/45070043/diff/20001/Documentation/web/news-front.itexi#newcode52
Documentation/web/news-front.itexi:52:
On 2013/12/23 00:41:28, Devon Schudy wrote:
https://codereview.appspot.com/45070043/diff/20001/Documentation/web/news-front.itexi
File Documentation/web/news-front.itexi (right):
https://codereview.appspot.com/45070043/diff/20001/Documentation/web/news-front.itexi#newcode52
26 matches
Mail list logo
