Il giorno sab, 10/11/2012 alle 14.35 +0100, Francisco Vila ha scritto:
> 2012/11/9 Phil Holmes :
> > I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening. All
> > seems OK except I tried to create a regtest comparison versus 2.16.0 and
> > instead got a c
- Original Message -
From: "Francisco Vila"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "Devel"
Sent: Saturday, November 10, 2012 1:35 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
2012/11/9 Phil Holmes :
I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening. All
seems OK
2012/11/9 Phil Holmes :
> I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening. All
> seems OK except I tried to create a regtest comparison versus 2.16.0 and
> instead got a comparison of 2.17.6 versus 2.16.0.
Grenouille is sending daily reports of failed builds.
- Original Message -
From: "Graham Percival"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: ; "David Kastrup"
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 6:32 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:02:04PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
- Original Message - From: &quo
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:02:04PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> - Original Message - From: "David Kastrup"
> To:
> Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:36 PM
> Subject: Re: 2.16.1
>
>
> >>I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this e
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To:
Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
"Phil Holmes" writes:
I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening.
All seems OK except I tried to create a regtest com
"Phil Holmes" writes:
> I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening.
> All seems OK except I tried to create a regtest comparison versus
> 2.16.0 and instead got a comparison of 2.17.6 versus 2.16.0.
But you are certain that the binary itself
I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening. All
seems OK except I tried to create a regtest comparison versus 2.16.0 and
instead got a comparison of 2.17.6 versus 2.16.0.
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-devel mailing
- Original Message -
From: "Graham Percival"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: ; "David Kastrup"
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 9:57 PM
Subject: Re: Releases 2.17.6 and 2.16.1
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 04:29:53PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
I finished building 2.1
On Sat, Nov 03, 2012 at 04:29:53PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> I finished building 2.17.6 about 30 minutes ago. Gub failed again,
> but I know how to fix this manually and have done so, so it's ready
> for upload.
I suggest a moratorium on releases until GUB works. Too many
things can go wrong w
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To:
Sent: Saturday, November 03, 2012 4:07 PM
Subject: Releases 2.17.6 and 2.16.1
Hi,
I have just been merging translation into stable (after checking
compilation, tests, and documentation). I am not totally happy with
2.16.1
Hi,
I have just been merging translation into stable (after checking
compilation, tests, and documentation). I am not totally happy with
2.16.1: we still have non-convergence on the line-count stuff (which I
will leave in its current state), and it is conceivable that there is
some regression
Fixes and changes after 2.16.0, New features in 2.16 since 2.14, Top, Top
+@section Fixes and changes after 2.16.0
+@table @b
+@item 2.16.1
+Please refer to the bug tracker for
+@uref{http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=1&q=Fixed_2_16_1,
+issues fixed in 2.16.1}.
+@end table
+
+@
Le 24/10/2012 17:28, David Kastrup disait :
"Phil Holmes" writes:
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "Devel"
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
"Phil Holmes" writes:
Davi
"Phil Holmes" writes:
> - Original Message -
> From: "David Kastrup"
> To: "Phil Holmes"
> Cc: "Devel"
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:28 PM
> Subject: Re: 2.16.1
>
>
>> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "Devel"
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2012 4:28 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
"Phil Holmes" writes:
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To: "Phil Ho
"Phil Holmes" writes:
> - Original Message -
> From: "David Kastrup"
> To: "Phil Holmes"
> Cc: "Devel"
> Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:17 PM
> Subject: Re: 2.16.1
>
>
>> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>&
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To: "Phil Holmes"
Cc: "Devel"
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2012 10:17 PM
Subject: Re: 2.16.1
"Phil Holmes" writes:
David,
I see you've done a lot of moving updates into 2.16.1. When do
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2012/10/23 David Kastrup :
>> Well, LilyPond could see a problem in connection with issue 2883. Not
>> because of a Spanish version of changes.tely but because of outdated
>> syntax in the Spanish version, syntax that just was not present in the
>> English version, and t
2012/10/23 David Kastrup :
> Well, LilyPond could see a problem in connection with issue 2883. Not
> because of a Spanish version of changes.tely but because of outdated
> syntax in the Spanish version, syntax that just was not present in the
> English version, and that did not get converted with
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2012/10/23 David Kastrup :
>
>> Well, the problem more or less is that changes.tely (in English or in
>> Spanish) does not have a \version header. I don't really know whether
>> this is intentional. It is possible that it is, in order to be able to
>> show before/after
2012/10/23 David Kastrup :
> Francisco Vila writes:
>
>> 2012/10/22 David Kastrup :
>>>
>>> Here is another problem with translations that is rather curious:
>>> commit bf1900d44f4937fe8e69e0e04e188a0c3daf5172
>>> Author: Francisco Vila
>>> Date: Thu May 31 11:18:26 2012 +0200
>>>
>>> has some
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2012/10/22 David Kastrup :
>>
>> Here is another problem with translations that is rather curious:
>> commit bf1900d44f4937fe8e69e0e04e188a0c3daf5172
>> Author: Francisco Vila
>> Date: Thu May 31 11:18:26 2012 +0200
>>
>> has some bit of English content in here that is
2012/10/22 David Kastrup :
>
> Here is another problem with translations that is rather curious:
> commit bf1900d44f4937fe8e69e0e04e188a0c3daf5172
> Author: Francisco Vila
> Date: Thu May 31 11:18:26 2012 +0200
>
> has some bit of English content in here that is totally out of place:
>
I first
Here is another problem with translations that is rather curious:
commit bf1900d44f4937fe8e69e0e04e188a0c3daf5172
Author: Francisco Vila
Date: Thu May 31 11:18:26 2012 +0200
has some bit of English content in here that is totally out of place:
+@code{\tweak} now takes an optional layout objec
2012/10/22 David Kastrup :
>> So that leaves the po files. Should I merge them over from translation
>> or not?
>>
>> Francisco, any idea?
>
> Turns out that running "make po-update" on the current version I arrived
> at leaves stuff unchanged.
Then do nothing. (Can you 'do nothing'?) I am not su
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
>>> If it is ok with people, I'd propose the following course in order to
>>> get the ball rolling again:
>>>
>>> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be unproblematic.
>>> Then I'll merge translation i
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> If it is ok with people, I'd propose the following course in order to
>> get the ball rolling again:
>>
>> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be unproblematic.
>> Then I'll merge translation into staging. This will require a
David Kastrup writes:
> If it is ok with people, I'd propose the following course in order to
> get the ball rolling again:
>
> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be unproblematic.
> Then I'll merge translation into staging. This will require a bit of
> cleanup and conflict re
Francisco Vila writes:
> 2012/10/21 David Kastrup :
>> David Kastrup writes:
>>
I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be
unproblematic.
>>>
>>> The only reaction to that was a mail from Francisco which did not much
>>> to address this part of my plan.
>>>
>>> I did this
2012/10/21 David Kastrup :
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>>> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be
>>> unproblematic.
>>
>> The only reaction to that was a mail from Francisco which did not much
>> to address this part of my plan.
>>
>> I did this right now, and afterwards discovere
2012/10/21 David Kastrup :
> I hope translati...@lilynet.net is not a dead list (or did its list
> server die, or is it "moderated" with no moderator ever approving
> posts?). At any rate, I sent several messages. The first I can only
> find in my mailing logs (Friday), but not in my mailing list
David Kastrup writes:
>> I'll merge stable/2.16 into translation. That should be
>> unproblematic.
>
> The only reaction to that was a mail from Francisco which did not much
> to address this part of my plan.
>
> I did this right now, and afterwards discovered that there is a branch
> translatio
David Kastrup writes:
> I hope translati...@lilynet.net is not a dead list (or did its list
> server die, or is it "moderated" with no moderator ever approving
> posts?). At any rate, I sent several messages.
At least the second one with cc to several individuals.
> From: David Kastrup
> Subj
Federico Bruni writes:
> Il giorno 21/ott/2012 05:17, "David Kastrup" ha scritto:
>>
>> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>>
>> > David,
>> >
>> > I see you've done a lot of moving updates into 2.16.1. When do you
>> > expec
Il giorno 21/ott/2012 05:17, "David Kastrup" ha scritto:
>
> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>
> > David,
> >
> > I see you've done a lot of moving updates into 2.16.1. When do you
> > expect to want a release for this?
>
> I've asked o
"Phil Holmes" writes:
> David,
>
> I see you've done a lot of moving updates into 2.16.1. When do you
> expect to want a release for this?
I've asked on the translator list whether they want to get something
translated from all the cherry-picking, and feedba
David,
I see you've done a lot of moving updates into 2.16.1. When do you expect
to want a release for this?
--
Phil Holmes
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Federico Bruni writes:
> Can you announce here the release of 2.16.1 at least a week before the
> actual release?
> So translators will have time to complete their works.
>
> I have a patch which will be ready next week and I hope it won't miss
> next stable release.
No d
Can you announce here the release of 2.16.1 at least a week before the
actual release?
So translators will have time to complete their works.
I have a patch which will be ready next week and I hope it won't miss
next stable release.
Thanks
--
Fed
40 matches
Mail list logo
