Re: Allow (closed) scheme function calls as text scripts. (issue 6812088)

2012-11-09 Thread Janek Warchoł
Hi David, On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:27 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote: [snip detailed explanation] thanks for explaining and sorry for not looking this up myself - i'm short on time and thus i do all reviews in a hurry... The commit message might be misleading, however, since it sounds like it is

Re: Adds documentation for optional octavation clef syntax (issue 6830043)

2012-11-09 Thread Janek Warchoł
Hi Marc, On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Am 08.11.2012 09:22, schrieb janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation doesn't mean that the octavation is optional (that is, it doesn't mean you may choose to play it in this octave or

Re: Adds documentation for optional octavation clef syntax (issue 6830043)

2012-11-09 Thread David Kastrup
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Am 08.11.2012 09:22, schrieb janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation doesn't mean that the octavation is optional (that is, it doesn't mean you may

Re: Adds documentation for optional octavation clef syntax (issue 6830043)

2012-11-09 Thread ArnoldTheresius
David Kastrup wrote Janek Warchoł lt; janek.lilypond@ gt; writes: On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marc Hohl lt; marc@ gt; wrote: Am 08.11.2012 09:22, schrieb janek.lilypond@ : I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation doesn't mean that the octavation is optional (that is,

Re: 2.16.1

2012-11-09 Thread David Kastrup
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net 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 is 2.16.1?

[talk] suggestion: redesign sponsoring page.

2012-11-09 Thread Janek Warchoł
Hi, regarding our discussion about LilyPond sponsorship (http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2012-11/msg00204.html), i see the following issues: - information about supporting Lily financially isn't visible enough, - users are confused as to how exactly they can support LilyPond

Re: 2.16.1

2012-11-09 Thread Phil Holmes
- Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org Sent: Friday, November 09, 2012 5:36 PM Subject: Re: 2.16.1 Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes: I've just built 2.16.1 and will be uploading it later this evening. All seems OK except I tried to

Re: [talk] suggestion: redesign sponsoring page.

2012-11-09 Thread David Kastrup
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: - on the sponsoring page, have just one disclaimer [1] There is no general LilyPond fund, because it would be too difficult to decide how the money should be divided between developers (and because the legal stuff would be a chore). Instead, we

Re: 2.16.1

2012-11-09 Thread Graham Percival
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 06:02:04PM -, Phil Holmes wrote: - Original Message - From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org 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 evening. All seems

Re: [talk] suggestion: redesign sponsoring page.

2012-11-09 Thread Jean-Charles Malahieude
Le 09/11/2012 18:55, Janek Warchoł disait : Hi, [...] By the way, the link to gitstats is nice, but i'm pretty sure that ordinary users, who don't know what a commit is and whether number of changed lines of code translate to coding skills, have little idea what all these numbers mean.

Re: [talk] suggestion: redesign sponsoring page.

2012-11-09 Thread Graham Percival
On Fri, Nov 09, 2012 at 07:07:53PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes: and they're so disorganized that they even don't know who's actively developing the program at the moment, and the whole thing 'isn't their business'... i estimate a 80%

Re: Adds documentation for optional octavation clef syntax (issue 6830043)

2012-11-09 Thread Marc Hohl
Am 09.11.2012 11:12, schrieb Janek Warchoł: Hi Marc, On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 9:32 AM, Marc Hohl m...@hohlart.de wrote: Am 08.11.2012 09:22, schrieb janek.lilyp...@gmail.com: I suppose that a parenthesized clef octavation doesn't mean that the octavation is optional (that is, it doesn't mean

Re: [talk] suggestion: redesign sponsoring page.

2012-11-09 Thread Janek Warchoł
On Fri, Nov 9, 2012 at 7:26 PM, Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca wrote: Yes. We had a long discussion leading to the current phrasing of the general text on the sponsoring page. I am skeptical about any need to change it. Well, this topic wasn't a part of GOP and it seems that it

Doc: Add example of extending glissandi over repeats (2591) (issue 6814115)

2012-11-09 Thread tdanielsmusic
Reviewers: , Message: Please review http://codereview.appspot.com/6814115/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeats.itely File Documentation/notation/repeats.itely (right): http://codereview.appspot.com/6814115/diff/1/Documentation/notation/repeats.itely#newcode343

Patchy report

2012-11-09 Thread grenouille
22:58:01 (UTC) Begin LilyPond compile, previous commit at a49f2bc12dc1ebf3de6da4573c3b296643d27e40 22:58:08 From git.savannah.gnu.org:/srv/git/lilypond * [new tag] release/2.16.1-1 - release/2.16.1-1 22:58:17 Merged staging, now at:a49f2bc12dc1ebf3de6da4573c3b296643d27e40

PATCH: COuntdown to 20121111

2012-11-09 Thread Colin Campbell
For 20:00 MST Sunday November 11 (with apologies for being asleep at the switch last night!) Defect: Issue 2946 : stroke fingers and string numbers suppressed when combined with lyrics - R 6827056 Enhancement: Issue 2958 : Patch: Add LilyPond Report #28 to news - R 6828049 Issue 2948 :