http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode450
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:450:
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi#newcode491
Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi:491:
I believe this will work out-of-the-box for any .TELY file,
regardless of whether texi2pdf is in the path or not. Please
test.
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-4.mingw.exe
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Graham Percival wrote Sunday, January 15, 2012 8:23 AM
I believe this will work out-of-the-box for any .TELY file,
regardless of whether texi2pdf is in the path or not. Please
test.
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-4.mingw.exe
Well, not quite. Two problems:
1. should be
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 08:59:58AM -, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Graham Percival wrote Sunday, January 15, 2012 8:23 AM
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-4.mingw.exe
Well, not quite. Two problems:
1. should be output_filename in lines 224 and 226 in book_texinfo.py
Whoops.
I believe this will at least produce the default line-widths
out-of-the-box for any texinfo or latex file, regardless of
whether texi2pdf is in the path or not. Please test.
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-5.mingw.exe
I am hopeful (though I am not optimistic) that it will work with
On 2012/01/15 08:05:35, Graham Percival wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:18:57PM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you misunderstand what git rebase does. git rebase
origin/staging does *not* bring origin/staging into dev/cg;
really? wow, I completely misunderstood that.
If origin/staging is bad, and then deleted, and
On 2012/01/15 08:17:35, Graham Percival wrote:
Could this entire @subsubheading be changed to read:
Done
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 2012/01/15 12:18:57, Carl wrote:
On 2012/01/15 08:05:35, Graham Percival wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/diff/1/Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi
File Documentation/contributor/source-code.itexi (right):
On 2012/01/15 12:32:21, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:18:57PM +,
mailto:carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you misunderstand what git rebase does. git rebase
origin/staging does *not* bring origin/staging into dev/cg;
really? wow, I completely
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:18:57PM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
I think you misunderstand what git rebase does. git rebase
origin/staging does *not* bring origin/staging into dev/cg;
really? wow, I completely misunderstood that.
On 2012/01/15 12:43:03, Carl wrote:
On 2012/01/15 12:32:21, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:18:57PM +,
mailto:carl.d.soren...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think you misunderstand what git rebase does. git rebase
origin/staging does *not* bring origin/staging into dev/cg;
On 2012/01/15 12:50:21, dak wrote:
On 2012/01/15 12:43:03, Carl wrote:
On 2012/01/15 12:32:21, Graham Percival wrote:
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 12:18:57PM +,
mailto:carl.d.soren...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think you misunderstand what git rebase does. git rebase
origin/staging does
After doing some testing, it appears that the following should be able
to get my dev/cg applied to origin/staging, while preserving my dev/cg:
git rebase origin/staging dev/cg~0
git push origin HEAD:staging
David, is this correct?
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/5539062/
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
merge from staging
maybe somebody pushed a commit directly to master?
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
merge from
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
merge from staging
maybe somebody pushed a commit directly to master?
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
merge from staging
maybe somebody pushed a commit directly to master?
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
merge from
On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 09:01:21AM -0800, lilypond.patchy.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
Begin LilyPond compile, commit: e25565e23b6e7a219c594d359495817d7076eff5
*** FAILED STEP ***
sorry, I forgot to warn you to about lines 45-46 in
compile_lilypond_test.py. You may want to comment those out for
- Original Message -
From: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net
To: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 27, 2011 11:34 AM
Subject: Further work on reducing make doc output - GOP 9
I've written a shell script that has as its arguments a command line and a
logfile. It runs
On 12-01-15 07:47 AM, Phil Holmes wrote:
snipped
OK - so I don't think anyone has looked at this. I think I've got 3
options: ask again here; make a patch from the test files I created,
make a new directory in my lilypond-git directory and put them up,
standalone, as a patch on Rietveld for
Graham, you wrote Sunday, January 15, 2012 9:32 AM
I believe this will at least produce the default line-widths
out-of-the-box for any texinfo or latex file, regardless of
whether texi2pdf is in the path or not. Please test.
http://lilypond.org/~graham/lilypond-2.15.25-5.mingw.exe
I
- Original Message -
From: Colin Campbell c...@shaw.ca
I would imagine you can change/drop the @afourpaper line, although these are
only ever intended as a proof of concept, so it's barely worth bothering.
Regarding your scripts: can they be modified to accept a variable paper
Hi,
The clickable examples in the docs have stopped working. The links
appear to be broken since they're missing the .ly suffix.
Try the example on this page:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/learning/clickable-examples
It goes to
Il 15/01/2012 17:51, Neil Puttock ha scritto:
I'm not sure how long it's been like this; I only noticed it when I
looked at the changes page today.
I noticed it ten days ago and forgot to report it (sorry).
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
Hello,
On 15 January 2012 17:03, Federico Bruni fedel...@gmail.com wrote:
Il 15/01/2012 17:51, Neil Puttock ha scritto:
I'm not sure how long it's been like this; I only noticed it when I
looked at the changes page today.
I noticed it ten days ago and forgot to report it (sorry).
Opened
LGTM
On 2012/01/15 08:05:35, Graham Percival wrote:
With this recipe, the
broken-staging will be in the developer's personal dev/cg branch.
Is there any way we can avoid this?
1) We could accept it as a consequence of re-writing the public history
on origin/staging. When the developer
Hi Phil, James Graham all,
2012/1/11 Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net:
- Original Message - From: Janek Warchoł
This might be a stupid question, but i never used lilypond-book
before: should i call it without any input file? If no, can you
provide example input?
I'll do this when
LGTM.
Now I see why this bug appeared. The recent changes to the beam
configuration code need to know the note-spacing, which depends on the
horizontal dot positions. So, dot configuration may not wait for
beaming.
The code configuring dots was (indirectly and wrongly) causing
rest-collision
Hi Patrick,
your patch was pushed when i was absent; now i see that Rietveld issue
is still opened. Could you close it please?
http://codereview.appspot.com/5096050/
Janek
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
On 2012/01/15 19:47:10, Keith wrote:
LGTM
On 2012/01/15 08:05:35, Graham Percival wrote:
With this recipe, the
broken-staging will be in the developer's personal dev/cg branch.
Is there any way we can avoid this?
1) We could accept it as a consequence of re-writing the public
history
On 2012/01/15 14:54:22, dak wrote:
An occasional
git rebase origin dev/cg
(which permanently rebases dev/cg on origin/master which we don't
reset ever by
gentlemen's agreement, meaning that if somebody does that, everybody
else stops
being a gentleman) should take care that most of
For Tuesday, January 17th, 2012
Critical:
Issue 2180
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2180: beams are
detached from stems - R 5538049 http://codereview.appspot.com/5538049/
Enhancement:
Issue 1846
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1846: Improves
LGTM. Seems like this can be pushed as soon as it gets approved by
Patchy. No need for a countdown, IMO.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5544075/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Looks good to me, but I wonder about the location.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/5540058/diff/1/Documentation/changes.tely
File Documentation/changes.tely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5540058/diff/1/Documentation/changes.tely#newcode210
Documentation/changes.tely:210:
Looks good to me, but I wonder about the location.
Thanks,
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/5540058/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: lemzwerg, carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, Keith,
http://codereview.appspot.com/5538049/diff/1/lily/staff-symbol-referencer.cc
File lily/staff-symbol-referencer.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5538049/diff/1/lily/staff-symbol-referencer.cc#newcode95
On 2012/01/15 23:15:01, Carl wrote:
On 2012/01/15 14:54:22, dak wrote:
git rebase origin dev/cg
My thoughts (almost) exactly. My set of commands would be
git checkout dev/cg
git rebase origin/master
which does exactly the same thing, only with different words.
I think it reaches
On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 11:12:49PM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but I wouldn't leave it in that state. The full set of commands is
git rebase origin/staging dev/cg~0
git push origin HEAD:staging
git checkout dev/cg
LGTM
At this point, you have pushed dev/cg to staging
39 matches
Mail list logo
