Il 25/02/2013 03:33, Steve Yegge ha scritto:
Hi Thomas, thanks for the reply.
I think there are two issues at play here. One issue is that user input
should never crash the program. It took nontrivial effort to track down
why my scores were crashing after upgrading Lilypond (since in some
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the output
shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong version
number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed, most of the differences are connecting bar
Phil Holmes writes:
I've run my pixel comparator
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
Nice. Is there any reason for not running this as part of the
release process in GUB and having it available next to
http://lilypond.org/test/
Greetings, Jan
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong
version number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed,
Hello,
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong
version number). Output is at
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe
contained the
On 25 févr. 2013, at 15:10, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the output shows this as
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
Hello,
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note -
the
output shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe
m...@mikesolomon.org m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
On 25 févr. 2013, at 15:10, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
James pkx1...@gmail.com writes:
On 25 February 2013 12:00, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net writes:
I've run my pixel comparator on
On 2013/02/24 16:20:53, mike7 wrote:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 17:18, David Kastrup mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
m...@mikesolomon.org mailto:m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 16:37, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
On 2013/02/24 13:27:39, mike7 wrote:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 12:40,
On 2013/02/25 00:01:50, dak wrote:
Hope I interpreted Trevor's comment correctly.
Not quite, but it is hardly a point worth labouring
over. Changes are listed with the most recent at the
top, and 'previously' means 'earlier in time', so it
ought to refer to items lower in the list. Perhaps
On 2013/02/25 16:02:41, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Not quite, but it is hardly a point worth labouring
over. Changes are listed with the most recent at the
top, and 'previously' means 'earlier in time', so it
ought to refer to items lower in the list.
Our changes list is not really ordered in
Hello all!
I've just secured over a year's worth of (big) commissions, and I'm in
negotiations with several companies for new productions of two of my musicals.
Long story short: I want (read: need!) a lot of my Lily-code frustrations
fixed in the next short while, so I don't spend countless
- Original Message -
From: Jan Nieuwenhuizen jann...@gnu.org
To: Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net
Cc: Devel lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2013 10:54 AM
Subject: Re: Regtest 2.17.13
Phil Holmes writes:
I've run my pixel comparator
Nice. Is there any reason for
LGTM.
https://codereview.appspot.com/7393055/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Maybe we should put span bars and possibly other metrically
challenged elements into the ever-changing regtest.
Nice idea!
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
Document Kievan ligature engraver
Adds subsection about Kievan ligatures to ancient notation section of
notation manual.
Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com/7382060/
Affected files:
M Documentation/notation/ancient.itely
2013/2/25 Phil Holmes em...@philholmes.net:
I've run my pixel comparator on 2.17.13 versus 2.17.12 (note - the output
shows this as 2.17.11 since the windows exe contained the wrong version
number). Output is at
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/regtestresults/2.17.13/
As might be supposed,
On 25 févr. 2013, at 16:29, d...@gnu.org wrote:
On 2013/02/24 16:20:53, mike7 wrote:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 17:18, David Kastrup mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
m...@mikesolomon.org mailto:m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 16:37, mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
On 2013/02/24
On 25 févr. 2013, at 23:34, m...@mikesolomon.org wrote:
On 25 févr. 2013, at 16:29, d...@gnu.org wrote:
On 2013/02/24 16:20:53, mike7 wrote:
On 24 févr. 2013, at 17:18, David Kastrup mailto:d...@gnu.org wrote:
m...@mikesolomon.org mailto:m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
On 24 févr.
On Sun, Feb 24, 2013 at 04:07:41PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
So we have 2 master copies of the pictures (and
also other stuff, like the PDFs).
My suggestion is that we should treat the LilyPond repo as the
master,
Yes, the ones in the main repository are the master versions.
However, note
Phil Holmes writes:
Mainly, it's written in C# on windows, so it
couldn't actually be run as part of GUB. I run it on my desktop
Is this an purely added-value, extra nice to have, or does LilyPond
somehow depend on it?
If anyone wants to do it, I'd be happy to provide the programs.
What
Graham Percival writes:
No argument there! Yes, more documentation about maintainability
the better.
I hope you're joking... The less documentation needed, whether it be
for program usage, describing program bugs, build or release process, or
maintainability, the better. No one likes to
23 matches
Mail list logo
