On 2011/11/07 00:15:48, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:52:15PM +, mailto:adam.spi...@gmail.com
wrote:
> I've done a corresponding patch for changes.tely but I don't have
> permissions to upload it to this issue
that's because Janek uploaded the original issue. Could y
On 11-11-06 05:31 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 05:24:25PM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
Would you also close the original Rietveld (code review) issue,
please, just in case I ever find the time to go searching through
Rietveld for outstanding patches?
can't. Talk to Janek,
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 05:24:25PM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
> Would you also close the original Rietveld (code review) issue,
> please, just in case I ever find the time to go searching through
> Rietveld for outstanding patches?
can't. Talk to Janek, who's dropped off the internet due to
mov
On 11-11-06 05:15 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:52:15PM +, adam.spi...@gmail.com wrote:
I've done a corresponding patch for changes.tely but I don't have
permissions to upload it to this issue
that's because Janek uploaded the original issue. Could you just
make a n
On Sun, Nov 06, 2011 at 03:52:15PM +, adam.spi...@gmail.com wrote:
> I've done a corresponding patch for changes.tely but I don't have
> permissions to upload it to this issue
that's because Janek uploaded the original issue. Could you just
make a new one? just ignore the old codereview issu
I've done a corresponding patch for changes.tely but I don't have
permissions to upload it to this issue so you'll have to get it from
here:
https://github.com/aspiers/lilypond/commit/3f02826bf5e8854f7da06b2f822d3a65cf63e487
http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/
___
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 03:25:30PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > I'm not beating myself up -- but when I see people spending
> > literally dozens of hours on tasks that could be automated with
> > 1-3 hours of programming, I hardly think that optimism is the
> > appropriate response. :(
>
> Given
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 02:52:32PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> Hey, give yourselves some credit - at least you're not using CVS;
>> *that's* what I would label as dark ages :-) git is still relatively
>> new for many many people. Also, be
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 02:52:32PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Hey, give yourselves some credit - at least you're not using CVS;
> *that's* what I would label as dark ages :-) git is still relatively
> new for many many people. Also, being short on experience doesn't
> make it impossible, it just
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 01:14:00PM +, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 12:10:20PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > Sure, understood - but I still don't see why each commit within a
> > single issue couldn't be checked accumulatively, rather than just
> > applying all three together
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 12:10:20PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Sure, understood - but I still don't see why each commit within a
> single issue couldn't be checked accumulatively, rather than just
> applying all three together and only then doing the check.
Because the person checking new patches
On 11/4/11 6:10 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 11:55:42AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> On 11/4/11 5:35 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>> >On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> >> I can't find the suggestion to replace tabs with spaces in this
>>review
On Fri, Nov 04, 2011 at 11:55:42AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 11/4/11 5:35 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
> >On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> >> I can't find the suggestion to replace tabs with spaces in this review
> >> string, so I can't comment on the suggestions
Carl Sorensen writes:
> In the case of your chords patch, I looked over each commit carefully
> and I'm quite certain that if the build status of the final commit is
> good, the build status of all previous commits will be good. So I'm
> comfortable with pushing your chord patches as a set of co
On 11/4/11 5:35 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers"
>>wrote:
>> >I originally avoided any pure-whitespace commits, but at the
>> >review of my initial patches, I was told to replace tabs with spaces
>> >in
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
> >I originally avoided any pure-whitespace commits, but at the
> >review of my initial patches, I was told to replace tabs with spaces
> >in the files I was modifying:
> >
> > http://codere
On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:28:53PM +, Graham Percival wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +, Peekay Ex wrote:
>>
>> Moving back to the jazz patches: Carl, could you take
On 11/3/11 1:13 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>Graham Percival writes:
>
>>
>> My understanding is that Jan insisted on the script matching
>> emacs' formatting, but as long as that's done he won't object.
>> (come to think of it, that may have been private email after the
>> main discussion died
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>
>> On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>> >and given my strong aversion to (a) a mix of indentation styles within
>> >a single file, and (b) commits which mix whitespace changes with real
>> >codin
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 06:28:55PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
> >and given my strong aversion to (a) a mix of indentation styles within
> >a single file, and (b) commits which mix whitespace changes with real
> >coding changes, I thought this was the
On 11/3/11 10:50 AM, "Adam Spiers" wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:28:53PM +, Graham Percival wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
>> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +, Peekay Ex wrote:
>> > > One patch per tracker item?
>> >
>> > I can do that
On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 4:28 PM, Graham Percival
wrote:
> We're not comfortable with git. Other than 4 or 5 people, each
> person who's started pushing to dev/staging has required between 3
> and 10 emails to get them able to reliably push to a branch
> without screwing stuff up.
I just discovere
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:28:53PM +, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +, Peekay Ex wrote:
> > > One patch per tracker item?
> >
> > I can do that if noone objects to tracker items for patches as tr
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 04:00:41PM +, Adam Spiers wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +, Peekay Ex wrote:
> > One patch per tracker item?
>
> I can do that if noone objects to tracker items for patches as trivial
> as converting tabs to whitespace?
I'd rather not see those patches
On Thu, Nov 03, 2011 at 11:13:28AM +, Peekay Ex wrote:
> Adam,
>
> On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:58 PM, wrote:
> > I think I am now finished. The new patch series is available at
> >
> > https://github.com/aspiers/lilypond/commits/jazz
> >
> > IMHO there are now too many patches in the series
Adam,
On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:58 PM, wrote:
> I think I am now finished. The new patch series is available at
>
> https://github.com/aspiers/lilypond/commits/jazz
>
> IMHO there are now too many patches in the series to combine into a
> single commit for review. To do so would lose a lot o
I think I am now finished. The new patch series is available at
https://github.com/aspiers/lilypond/commits/jazz
IMHO there are now too many patches in the series to combine into a
single commit for review. To do so would lose a lot of clarity in the
git history. So I am not sure how this
I have finally figured out how to reproduce these regressions,
and am working on a fix.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Passes make test but fails reg test check.
See:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1572#c7
for more information
James
http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.or
LGTM AFAICT, but I am not familiar with chord notation.
Presumably there should be some doc changes? These can either be
included with this patch or separately. If the latter, please make a
new issue for the docs when this is pushed so we don't forget.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/di
LGTM
http://codereview.appspot.com/4981052/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: adam.spiers,
Message:
Patches from Adam Spiers.
Description:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1503
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1572
1503 - Allow choice of prefix for chord modifiers.
This was previously "add", e.g. "Cmaj7 add6add9",
but this
32 matches
Mail list logo
