Re: What is holding up 2.20 release?
Jonas Hahnfeld writes: > Hi David, > > Am Montag, den 18.11.2019, 18:10 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: >> Am Samstag, den 16.11.2019, 21:52 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> > Carl Sorensen < >> > c_soren...@byu.edu >> > >> > > writes: >> > > Dear Team, >> > > >> > > It seems to me like we are pretty much in shape such that we should >> > > release 2.20. I'd be fine if we called 2.19.83-1 the 2.20 release, >> > > even if there are some critical regressions. 2.19.83 is SO much >> > > better than 2.18.2. >> > > >> > > IIUC, the only thing 2.20 is waiting on is for David K. to cherry-pick >> > > some patches. Is that correct? >> > >> > And putting out a new prerelease to be sure that those are ok, and >> > waiting for the translators to catch up with cherry-picked patches >> > containing stuff to be translated. >> > >> > But the current roadblock is David K. cherry-picking some patches. Here >> > is a remaining list (not completely up to date with current master, >> > though not missing much) to check for possible inclusion (assuming I >> > have not overlooked something important pickable in the sequence >> > before). If you see something important here (or something not in >> > current master), put in a word for it. >> >> Thanks for the list of candidates, I processed around half of it for >> now (+ some dependencies as mentioned below). >> All commits that I think should be "picked" are also readily available >> in my branch origin/dev/hahnjo/stable-2.20. Let me know if those are ok >> and I can easily push to stable/2.20. > > I've noticed that you picked a handful of commits to stable/2.20 last > week. Does it still make sense for me to maintain my branch (and > continue going through the list) if you're doing the work yourself > anyhow? I've worked from your list so far, checking the stuff individually, skipping over things that just were too rife in conflict and so on, and using cherry-pick -x for keeping better track. I'm not yet through the annotated commit list you posted. I've been working with your preparatory work and its description but not with your branch. Does this help you deciding where to focus? As long as we have no formal handoff of release manager duties (I won't rule that out eventually but it seems like you'd deserve more preparation than what you got), I think that's sort-of reasonable. -- David Kastrup
Re: make test-baseline fails
>>> $ tidy --version >>> HTML Tidy for Linux version 5.2.0 >> >> I'll try to get it and fix the issue. https://codereview.appspot.com/551250043/ — Dan
Re: make test-baseline fails
Am Fr., 6. Dez. 2019 um 19:58 Uhr schrieb Dan Eble : > > On Dec 6, 2019, at 13:54, Thomas Morley wrote: > > > >> This is tidy complaining about index.html. What version of tidy do you > >> have (tidy --version)? My build environment has 5.6.0 and it isn't > >> complaining. > > > > $ tidy --version > > HTML Tidy for Linux version 5.2.0 > > I'll try to get it and fix the issue. I'm not sure if you can work around it > by some argument to configure.sh, but you should be able to work around it by > changing TIDY to "false" in config.make in the top-level build directory. > — > Dan > configure has the option --disable-FEATURE do not include FEATURE (same as --enable-FEATURE=no) No clue whether --disable-tidy will work Anyway, I'll first wait for `make doc´ to finish (which will last a long time) before I give it a try. Thanks, Harm
Re: make test-baseline fails
On Dec 6, 2019, at 13:54, Thomas Morley wrote: > >> This is tidy complaining about index.html. What version of tidy do you have >> (tidy --version)? My build environment has 5.6.0 and it isn't complaining. > > $ tidy --version > HTML Tidy for Linux version 5.2.0 I'll try to get it and fix the issue. I'm not sure if you can work around it by some argument to configure.sh, but you should be able to work around it by changing TIDY to "false" in config.make in the top-level build directory. — Dan
Re: make test-baseline fails
Am Fr., 6. Dez. 2019 um 19:50 Uhr schrieb Dan Eble : > > On Dec 6, 2019, at 12:32, Thomas Morley wrote: > > > > Validating > > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/index.html > > line 73 column 76 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value > > line 79 column 169 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value > > line 73 column 76 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute > > line 79 column 169 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute > > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:376: recipe for > > target 'local-check' failed > > make: *** [local-check] Error 1 > > This is tidy complaining about index.html. What version of tidy do you have > (tidy --version)? My build environment has 5.6.0 and it isn't complaining. > — > Dan > $ tidy --version HTML Tidy for Linux version 5.2.0 Harm
Re: make test-baseline fails
On Dec 6, 2019, at 12:32, Thomas Morley wrote: > > Validating > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/index.html > line 73 column 76 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value > line 79 column 169 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value > line 73 column 76 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute > line 79 column 169 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:376: recipe for > target 'local-check' failed > make: *** [local-check] Error 1 This is tidy complaining about index.html. What version of tidy do you have (tidy --version)? My build environment has 5.6.0 and it isn't complaining. — Dan
Re: What is holding up 2.20 release?
Hi David, Am Montag, den 18.11.2019, 18:10 +0100 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld: > Am Samstag, den 16.11.2019, 21:52 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: > > Carl Sorensen < > > c_soren...@byu.edu > > > > > writes: > > > Dear Team, > > > > > > It seems to me like we are pretty much in shape such that we should > > > release 2.20. I'd be fine if we called 2.19.83-1 the 2.20 release, > > > even if there are some critical regressions. 2.19.83 is SO much > > > better than 2.18.2. > > > > > > IIUC, the only thing 2.20 is waiting on is for David K. to cherry-pick > > > some patches. Is that correct? > > > > And putting out a new prerelease to be sure that those are ok, and > > waiting for the translators to catch up with cherry-picked patches > > containing stuff to be translated. > > > > But the current roadblock is David K. cherry-picking some patches. Here > > is a remaining list (not completely up to date with current master, > > though not missing much) to check for possible inclusion (assuming I > > have not overlooked something important pickable in the sequence > > before). If you see something important here (or something not in > > current master), put in a word for it. > > Thanks for the list of candidates, I processed around half of it for > now (+ some dependencies as mentioned below). > All commits that I think should be "picked" are also readily available > in my branch origin/dev/hahnjo/stable-2.20. Let me know if those are ok > and I can easily push to stable/2.20. I've noticed that you picked a handful of commits to stable/2.20 last week. Does it still make sense for me to maintain my branch (and continue going through the list) if you're doing the work yourself anyhow? Jonas signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Issue 5629: Staff_symbol clean-up (issue 571210043 by nine.fierce.ball...@gmail.com)
LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/571210043/
Re: make test-baseline fails
Am Fr., 6. Dez. 2019 um 14:38 Uhr schrieb Thomas Morley : > > Hi, > > I just tried `make test-baseline´ form current master: > 17abdc1c92a4d2efc188aa98ddd265b8c15d6889 > > It fails with: > > [...] > Making input/regression/lilypond-book/out-test/suffix-latex.pdf < tex > Error: /invalidfileaccess in --file-- > Operand stack: >(/home/hermann/.local/share/fonts/C059-Bold.otf) (r) > Execution stack: >%interp_exit .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- > --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- > --nostringval-- --nostringval-- false 1 %stopped_push 1974 > 1 3 %oparray_pop 1973 1 3 %oparray_pop 1961 1 3 > %oparray_pop 1817 1 3 %oparray_pop --nostringval-- > %errorexec_pop .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- > --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- > Dictionary stack: >--dict:732/1123(ro)(G)-- --dict:0/20(G)-- --dict:76/200(L)-- > Current allocation mode is local > Last OS error: Permission denied > Current file position is 238 > GPL Ghostscript GIT PRERELEASE 9.51: Unrecoverable error, exit code 1 > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/./make/lilypond-book-rules.make:35: > recipe for target 'out-test/suffix-latex.pdf' failed > make[3]: *** [out-test/suffix-latex.pdf] Error 1 > make[3]: *** Deleting file 'out-test/suffix-latex.pdf' > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/./input/regression/lilypond-book/GNUmakefile:22: > recipe for target 'local-test' failed > make[2]: *** [local-test] Error 2 > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:326: recipe for > target 'test' failed > make[1]: *** [test] Error 2 > /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:337: recipe for > target 'test-baseline-pre' failed > make: *** [test-baseline-pre] Error 2 > > I use selfcompiled ghostscript 9.51 and guile-1.8.8 (don't get > confused by the repo-name) > > > Any insights? > > Cheers, > Harm Ok, I downgraded to ghostscript 9.26. Then I did `make test-clean´ without complaints. Though `make doc-clean´ returned: $ make doc-clean /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/./Documentation/po/GNUmakefile:30: warning: overriding recipe for target 'po-update' /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/stepmake/stepmake/podir-targets.make:14: warning: ignoring old recipe for target 'po-update' Which is strange. Trying `make test-baseline´ now succeeded. Alas, `make check´ on _unchanged_ master: [...] Making input/regression/lilypond-book/out-test/texinfo-papersize-docs.pdf < texi comparing input/regression/out-test-baseline to input/regression/out-test 2098 signature 0 midi 1344 log 1344 profile 1 gittxt comparing input/regression/midi/out-test-baseline to input/regression/midi/out-test 30 signature 39 midi 30 log 30 profile 0 gittxt comparing input/regression/midi/out-test-baseline/recovered to input/regression/midi/out-test/recovered 0 signature 0 midi 0 log 0 profile 0 gittxt no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-scoping-1.midi no source for input/regression/out-test/tree.gittxt no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-scoping-2.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-scoping-5.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-scoping-3.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-scoping-4.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-1.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-3.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/dynamic-initial-1.midi no source for input/regression/midi/out-test/sequence-name-2.midi output-distance summary: 2 changed 0 in baseline only 52 below threshold 3981 unchanged 0 new writing /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/input/regression/out-test-baseline/test-output-distance.png writing /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/input/regression/out-test/test-output-distance.png writing /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/index.txt Validating /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/build/out/test-results/index.html line 73 column 76 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value line 79 column 169 - Warning: attribute "alt/" lacks value line 73 column 76 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute line 79 column 169 - Warning: lacks "alt" attribute /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:376: recipe for target 'local-check' failed make: *** [local-check] Error 1 Well, I'd need some help here... No clue what's going on and why, all I wanted was test a possible patch localy... I try `make LANGS='' doc´ on unchanged master now. Cheers, Harm
Re: Poster for music engraving conference
Hi Jan-Peter, that sounds like a very nice idea. However, I'm so involved in the conference already (along with my other duties which are quite overwhelming right now) that I can't commit to that beyond maybe occasional commenting or helping out with some lyluatex syntax/options. From what I see in this thread I have the impression that it's necessary that *someone* steps out, creates a repository and a basic file, having some confidence not to stay alone with the task. Best Urs Am 05.12.19 um 15:43 schrieb Jan-Peter Voigt: Hi Werner, hi Bernhard, and especially Urs ;-), what about using a LaTeX a0poster-template together with lyluatex? That would make collaboration with GIT straightforward. A quick search brought up these templates: https://www.cfd.tu-berlin.de/~panek/tex/poster/poster.html http://www.latextemplates.com/cat/conference-posters Though, the template(s) need some adaption to work with lualatex. Even though my schedule is quite tight I would like to contribute. I have obtained the permission from two publishers to use single excerpts/pictures from the St.Mark passion (Ortus Berlin, I will talk about it) and a contemporary score composed by Hermann Keller (Edition Juliane Klein Berlin). Jan-Peter Am 04.12.19 um 12:05 schrieb Werner LEMBERG: Folks, the music engraving conference in Salzburg (January 17.-19.) aims to present as much note engraving programs as possible. While some companies send representatives (e.g., Dorico, Capella, Finale) – some even with talks – we don't have something similar for LilyPond in the main part of the conference. Instead, we would like to have a poster (in A0 format) that shows how LilyPond works, together with some showcase results. Now my question: Are there people who are willing to produce such a poster? Has anyone already done something similar for other conferences? Werner
make test-baseline fails
Hi, I just tried `make test-baseline´ form current master: 17abdc1c92a4d2efc188aa98ddd265b8c15d6889 It fails with: [...] Making input/regression/lilypond-book/out-test/suffix-latex.pdf < tex Error: /invalidfileaccess in --file-- Operand stack: (/home/hermann/.local/share/fonts/C059-Bold.otf) (r) Execution stack: %interp_exit .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- false 1 %stopped_push 1974 1 3 %oparray_pop 1973 1 3 %oparray_pop 1961 1 3 %oparray_pop 1817 1 3 %oparray_pop --nostringval-- %errorexec_pop .runexec2 --nostringval-- --nostringval-- --nostringval-- 2 %stopped_push --nostringval-- Dictionary stack: --dict:732/1123(ro)(G)-- --dict:0/20(G)-- --dict:76/200(L)-- Current allocation mode is local Last OS error: Permission denied Current file position is 238 GPL Ghostscript GIT PRERELEASE 9.51: Unrecoverable error, exit code 1 /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/./make/lilypond-book-rules.make:35: recipe for target 'out-test/suffix-latex.pdf' failed make[3]: *** [out-test/suffix-latex.pdf] Error 1 make[3]: *** Deleting file 'out-test/suffix-latex.pdf' /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/./input/regression/lilypond-book/GNUmakefile:22: recipe for target 'local-test' failed make[2]: *** [local-test] Error 2 /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:326: recipe for target 'test' failed make[1]: *** [test] Error 2 /home/hermann/lilypond-git-guile-2.2/GNUmakefile.in:337: recipe for target 'test-baseline-pre' failed make: *** [test-baseline-pre] Error 2 I use selfcompiled ghostscript 9.51 and guile-1.8.8 (don't get confused by the repo-name) Any insights? Cheers, Harm
