Comment #14 on issue 2783 by [email protected]: wrong placement of timesignature
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2783
well, yes and no. this code may have been in place for ten years, but the meaning of line_count changed with commit d10ec4f5 (sometime around 2.15.20 - I don't have the sources at hand, but see http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2109#c18 ); as a consequence, a simple revert wouldn't make Gagi happy, I'm afraid. (aside 1: I know nobody else bitten by this change of semantics of Staff_symbol::line_count, as far as issues and regtests I've seen are representative. aside 2: the patch in issue 2109 caused issue 2249, where again revert was suggested. my problem is not reversion in itself, but unconsidered reversion.) so what about using centre-of-staff, i.e. (min(line-positions) + max(line-positions)) / 2? is it worth preparing such a patch? note it will change behaviour relative to 2.14 in the case of overriding line-count, not line-positions. p
