On Fri, 26 Sep 2003 07:04:51 -0400 David Raleigh Arnold <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 24 September 2003 08:30 pm, Graham Percival wrote: > > On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 00:59:11 +0200 > > > \version "1.7.28" > > > > There were no syntax changes between version 1.7.28 and 1.8.0, so > > LilyPond merely printed the number of the version for the last > > change it made. > > > > That said, it might be nicer if it printed the number of its current > > version to avoid this confusion. I can't think of any downside to > > changing that behaviour, but I'll need to check with Han and/or Jan. > > I was wondering about that, thanks. Might I request adding the > number of the current version but not removing the version > of the last change? A comment would not only be easier to > do but more reassuring if not more useful. > > % Last change version. Current version is "n-n-n": > \version "n-n-n"
Han or Jan? Is there any downside to printing the number of the current LilyPond version instead of the version of the last change? I think it'd be nicer to just have the single version number instead of having the comment as well. Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ Lilypond-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
