"Phil Holmes" <m...@philholmes.net> writes: > ----- Original Message ----- > From: <d...@gnu.org> > >> On 2014/08/12 12:16:12, mail_philholmes.net wrote: >>> From: <mailto:d...@gnu.org> >> >>> > >>> > Yes, I would object to scaling the dimensions of the incipit >>> > line-width >>> > and indent by the 1.76 factor since that is just an ad-hoc >>> > approximation >>> > for a single case. >> >>> Shame you didn't when I first asked. >> >> Patch 1 did not contain such an ad-hoc factor, patch 2 has been up for >> less than two hours. >> >> I have no idea what I am supposed to be at blame for here. > > As I said in my earlier mail, my proposal to do it this way was in an > email from July 4 to -devel. Having had no response, I then had to > spend a while working out how to do it.
So I am supposed to be ashamed for not working out a solution for every problem anybody has while working with or on LilyPond? No, I don't have 100% coverage and I don't pretend I do. > Thus my patch with the implied OK. If I am not on record for some topic, there is no implied OK. In particular not an "implied OK" for code I have not even had an opportunity to see. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
