%{ Fellow Contributors,
The patches look like they do the job, and give clean regression tests,
but the developers are hesitant. I am not a programmer, and I cannot
read minds, but I can tell you what makes *me* hesitant.
Look at issue 1120. A lyric syllable covering more than one note spread
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 01:33:10 -0800, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
... because that fixes 1120 more
solidly and removes the cause for issues 1474 and 1472,
Well, reverting ee0488 removes the cause of our /noticing/ issue 1472
(multi-measure rests colliding with key signatures).
The
Pushed to Rietveld:http://codereview.appspot.com/4056043
Note that there is a trailing whitespace error on line 47 of the diff.
Cheers,
MS
On Jan 20, 2011, at 5:13 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
On Thu, 20 Jan 2011 01:33:10 -0800, Keith OHara k-ohara5...@oco.net wrote:
... because that fixes 1120
Regtest comparison shows nothing suspicious, and it builds the docs from
scratch. Seems good to me.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4056043/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
In NR 2.1.1 (Multiple notes to a syllable) we have an example for
melismaBusyProperties, which is extremely misleading, as it gives the
expression that this property can be used to skip notes without assigning a
lyrics syllable:
On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 20:48 +, Keith OHara wrote:
Carl Sorensen c_sorensen at byu.edu writes:
So what is the current status on 1474?
I think that the latest proposal from Keith O'Hara was to revert ee0488.
Issue 1474 looks like intentional behavior to me, and non-regressive to
