Re: Back in the Pond

2017-06-05 Thread Trevor Daniels
Hi David Thanks for the update. You wrote Monday, May 29, 2017 9:56 PM > Gianmaria Lari writes: >> >> what's the better way to give a financial contribution? > > In Europe's EURO zone (guessing from your name, that would likely be the > case) SEPA transfers are

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-05-29 Thread David Kastrup
Gianmaria Lari writes: > Trevor wrote: > > >> I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. >> > > what's the better way to give a financial contribution? In Europe's EURO zone (guessing from your name, that would likely be the case) SEPA transfers are

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes: > David Kastrup writes: > >> Alexander Kobel writes: >> >>> +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { >>> ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for >>> choir literature

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread Alexander Kobel
On 2017-01-20 10:46, David Kastrup wrote: > Knut Petersen writes: > >> Hi everybody! >> +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for choir literature (especially

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread Knut Petersen
The autoextender patch only adds extenders at places where extenders can be added without it. That does not sound like we should remove __ from lyrics to me. I don't understand that comment. With the autoextender patch there will be an extender if a melisma is detected and there is enough

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread Alexander Kobel
Hi (almost) everybory (dropping -user)! On 2017-01-20 10:20, Knut Petersen wrote: > Hi everybody! > >>> +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { >>> ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for >>> choir literature (especially combined with the

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread David Kastrup
Knut Petersen writes: > Hi everybody! > >>> +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { >>> ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for >>> choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic >>> extenders).

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes: > Alexander Kobel writes: > >> +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { >> ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for >> choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic >>

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread Knut Petersen
Hi everybody! +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic extenders). Unfortunately, assignment of lyrics to *container* contexts does not

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-20 Thread David Kastrup
Graham Percival writes: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 02:01:40PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: >> "Trevor Daniels" writes: >> >> > David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM >> > >> >> it would appear that my excursion into a regular

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread David Kastrup
Alexander Kobel writes: > +1. A personal wish: I think that \lyricsto ChoirStaff = "ctx" { > ... } has the potential to be a killer feature w.r.t. usability for > choir literature (especially combined with the upcoming automatic > extenders). Unfortunately, assignment of

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Graham Percival
On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 02:01:40PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote: > "Trevor Daniels" writes: > > > David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM > > > >> it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up > >> somewhat shortlived. Ouch, that sucks.

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Alexander Kobel
Hi David, On 2017-01-19 12:59, Trevor Daniels wrote: David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up somewhat shortlived. Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! Ditto. I wish that you would have

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Gianmaria Lari
Trevor wrote: > I'll definitely turn on my financial contribution again. > what's the better way to give a financial contribution? g. ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Simon Albrecht
On 19.01.2017 14:01, David Kastrup wrote: it is an open question whether it makes sense to admit it into 2.20.0 (or was the first version 2.20.1) We had 2.18.0 and 2.18.2. Best, Simon ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread David Kastrup
"Trevor Daniels" writes: > David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM > >> it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up >> somewhat shortlived. > > Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! > >> So for the short time

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Trevor Daniels
David, you wrote Thursday, January 19, 2017 10:18 AM > it would appear that my excursion into a regular workplace ended up somewhat shortlived. Really sorry to hear that, but it's great to have you back! > So for the short time range, I am again dependent > on support by other LilyPond

Re: Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread Urs Liska
Hi David, Am 19.01.2017 um 11:18 schrieb David Kastrup: > But at any rate, I hope to be on board at least for making LilyPond 2.20 > a thing. to cut your long story even shorter: sad but glad to read that. Urs -- u...@openlilylib.org https://openlilylib.org http://lilypondblog.org

Back in the Pond

2017-01-19 Thread David Kastrup
arranged because my finances were not really working out with LilyPond. I don't quite know where to go from here, so I'm pretty sure to be around at least for February back in the Pond, and I'll probably take a look at what options we have to divert donations through the FSF. They take a 10 percent