On Wed, 01 May 2013 21:07:52 -0700, Jay Anderson <[email protected]> wrote:
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 12:15 AM, Keith OHara <[email protected]> wrote:
If one of these things puts the page-breaking back to the old way
[...]
then something in my change to give space to tempo marks has caused trouble.
(moving to the bug list)
from <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-user/2013-05/>
Git bisect led to commit b6f94447415dded7c6e146b41b6139fe76cb84c4
(http://git.savannah.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=commitdiff;h=b6f94447415dded7c6e146b41b6139fe76cb84c4).
I do have a '\tempo 4=108' in the score (for midi purposes), but it is
hidden with
tempoHideNote = ##t
Thanks. The change we each pointed to was intended to include tempo marks properly
in spacing. I re-test with a few cases, and suspected that my initial space
allowance for tempo was a bit too high. I failed to consider a completely hidden
tempo. <http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3342>
There is a further mystery why, in your example on -uers, all your staff
extents have a top edge estimated at -3.8 staff spaces; I would have expected
0.0. If a lot of people have scores where the estimated-extents are shifted
down like this, then I cannot give space to tempo marks without rewriting they
way they are estimated for page-breaking (and changes that deep will wait for
verison 2.20).
Tell us if you think we should keep the change you bisected to
<http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=3279>
_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
