David,
I saw that Colin had opened a tracker for your *ly file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2445
I'm not a code developer, however I think it might be better to also
open a Rietveld issue so that it gets a proper review, from my own
experience, it is more likely to be
Hello list,
if someone has loaded and tried my files on a windows machine, they
probably didn't compile.
So I uploaded a new version, which should compile on windows - well it
did not on an old W2k machine, I could use to test ... and so I changed
some things regarding the scheme-function
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
If I could have worked out how to split them, while at the same time
being able to keep track of what changes were still needed, I would
have done. However, doing things like having a screech-boink.ly in
new, with a
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: Staging/Master Merge - James' Patchy
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
If I could have worked out how to
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:50:16PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
My comment relates to the need to git add as a separate step.
You _only_ need to use git add if you made your changes _manually_ in
the work directory instead of going through git.
I had to read David's email a few times, and
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net
Cc: lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: Staging/Master Merge - James' Patchy
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca writes:
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 12:50:16PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
My comment relates to the need to git add as a separate step.
You _only_ need to use git add if you made your changes _manually_ in
the work directory instead of going through
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
No way to sort the patches in a manner where they work out at every
step?
It may well have been, but it would have taken far more effort than
compressing them into a single commit. At that point, my brain was
already hurting.
_Please_ check out git
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: Graham Percival gra...@percival-music.ca
Cc: Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net; lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: Staging/Master Merge - James' Patchy
Did I mention git rebase -i already?
Phil Holmes m...@philholmes.net writes:
I'm sure branches would be more efficient and more git-like, but last
time I tried multiple branches, I forgot what state each was in. With
patches I can open them in an editor and look at them.
git log -p some_branch_name
And I am aware of gitk, but
On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 8:33 PM, Karol Majewski
karol.majew...@gmail.com wrote:
OK, thanks for explanation! Actually, I've menaged to solve my problem by
entering hidden notes with unHidden slur in separate voice. Now the tie
refers to the right notes and appeals to my sense of aesthetic -
Helge,
On 11 April 2012 13:02, Helge Kruse helge.kruse-nos...@gmx.net wrote:
Am 11.04.2012 19:24, schrieb James:
Well it requires that any changes I do in the English document are
picked up and translated by the trasnaltors. The assumption is that
those that do the German Translating see my
12 matches
Mail list logo
