On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 06:50:33PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> obviously I have been too
> clever about this change done automatically and half-reverted. I did
> not commit the convert-ly rule since it was somewhat fishy IIRC and
> while it worked, I checked the results manually.
>
> I probably
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 06:10:00PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> This is a live and learn. I typically don't add untracked files to patches,
> because there are loads of them - git-cl; the aborted_edits from lily-git,
> etc., etc. I'd not realised that updates from the LSR could also add files
> an
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 03:18:53AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> building package: darwin-ppc::lilypond
> *** Stage: compile (lilypond, darwin-ppc)
>
> and now nothing seems to be happening. It's staying here forever, no disk
> activity, no change in memory.
Well, it might be that the build sy
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 11:27:38AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> My guess is that two incantations of Patchy were at work here, and one
> of them copied a tested staging to master while the other one was still
> working with older material.
There's only one version of Patchy doing the staging stuf
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 12:22:17PM +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
> I have a final draft (see files attached):
>
> I'm quite happy with this version.
Given my time constraints, I am happy to trust you. I fully
expect that you'll get complaints whenever this makes its way into
the actual docs, but
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 01:12:30PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> >I'm not too fussed about that, but the second line should be indented by
> >two spaces to indicate that it's a continuation of the previous line
> >(i.e. not starting its own bar). I certainly wouldn't object to having
> >an explicit
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 12:10:14AM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 2011/12/30 20:57:02, Graham Percival wrote:
> >I'm still concerned about this type of automatic pushing. The revised
> CG
> >material on branches
> > http://codereview.appspot.com
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 06:05:17AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I am interested in getting a new stable release of LilyPond out, so I want to
> work on Critical issues.
Great! We have definitely suffered from having those critical
issues.
> There are 3 critical issues, all of which will requir
On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 06:12:58AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> More information: When I ran the command by hand, I got this message:
>
> carl@carl-lilydev:~/gub/target/darwin-ppc/build/cross/gcc-4.1.1$ make
> tooldir='/usr/powerpc-apple-darwin7' gcc_tooldir='/usr/powerpc-apple-darwin7'
Be awa
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 05:21:34PM +, carl.d.soren...@gmail.com wrote:
> The Push button is disabled by default; an experienced user can enable
> it with a simple edit to the script.
By "disabled", do you mean "commented out" ? If new contributors
see a greyed-out button, they'll get confused
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:03:43AM -0700, Aleksandr Andreev wrote:
> Aha. Some Googling reveals that:
>
> Exit code 137: The job was killed because it exceeded the time limit.
Don't top-post.
> Any ideas how to up the time limit?
Unless you have an incredibly under-powered computer (say, 10
year
On Tue, Dec 27, 2011 at 05:14:41PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> More looking at make doc output. This set of error messages
> ("Error: Illegal entry in bfrange block in ToUnicode CMap") has been
> discussed before, and it's not a Lilypond issue, it's to do with
> texi2pdf on Ubuntu.
If you can fin
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 10:23:55PM +, hashas...@gmail.com wrote:
> Let me know if this is what you are thinking:
>
> 1. upload those files to github (tell me the folder, I create a pull
> request)
Let's make a new folder, pdf/
> 2. make makefiles copy the files to the correct place
yes.
>
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 06:50:11PM +, James wrote:
> Well that was the first thing I thought. I have copied this from the
> terminal and when that didn't work I deleted my whole /.ssh dir,
> deleted the key from savannah, waited an hour and then redid the whole
> process (get a new key, paste i
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 06:33:20PM +, James wrote:
> james@jameslilydev2:~/lilypond-git$ ls -al /home/james/.ssh/
> total 20
> drwx-- 2 james james 4096 2011-12-26 18:17 .
> drwxr-xr-x 37 james james 4096 2011-12-26 18:15 ..
> -rw--- 1 james james 1743 2011-12-26 18:15 id_rsa
> -rw-r-
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 06:21:35PM +, James wrote:
> debug1: Next authentication method: publickey
> debug1: Offering public key: /home/james/.ssh/id_rsa
shouldn't that be id_rsa.pub ?
> debug1: Authentications that can continue: publickey
> debug1: Trying private key: /home/james/.ssh/identi
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 02:38:31PM -0600, Michael Walker wrote:
>Having upgraded to OSX Lion, I quickly noticed that LilyPond isn't
>functional yet. I know you guys are aware of this and probably working
>on it, but could you possibly give me a date that I could look forward
>to usi
On Mon, Dec 26, 2011 at 12:32:51PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> Official comparison looks good. Only oddity is 3 logfiles with:
>
> -warning: cannot fit music on page: ragged-spacing was requested,
> but page was compressed
>
> which ostensibly seems good, since we've lost a warning. I'm still
>
I've isolated a build-breaking commit to at least one of the 3
that's in the
staging-broken-dec-26
branch. Tomorrow I'll do some more experiments on the other build
patches to see if any of those can be merged to master.
origin/staging should be empty right now, so other patches to it
are wel
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 11:07:59PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> git log another..branch
>
> Of course, things that have been cherry-picked already are still listed.
Can't that be avoided by looking at the difference between current
master (or current staging) and staging-broken-dec23 ?
Cheers,
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 05:13:29PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Patchy is running every 6 hours at the moment (GMT / 6), and
> > there's no rush to get another release out, so let's just put
> > stuff into staging gradually.
On Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 07:16:47PM +0100, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Dec 24, 2011, at 1:43 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> > Patchy is running every 6 hours at the moment (GMT / 6), and
> > there's no rush to get another release out, so let's just put
>
Hey all,
In order to remove the blockage to development, I've made a copy
of the previous staging branch: it's now called
staging-broken-dec23. I've replaced staging with
master+release/unstable, and Patchy is testing that right now.
Once that's been accepted to master, people are invited to
che
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 02:05:22AM +0100, Francisco Vila wrote:
> 2011/12/23 David Kastrup :
> > No idea. But the symptom would suggest that
> >
> > commit 77cfd9e80a9792737a8630ba3c3ecfb359950f9d
> > Author: Francisco Vila
> > Date: Wed Dec 21 22:54:53 2011 +0100
> >
> > Web: remove web/ in
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 01:23:38AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Error (196): Command token too long
> > ^Cmake[3]: *** Deleting file `out-www/collated-files.pdf'
> > /usr/bin/texi2dvi: pdfetex exited with bad status, quitting.
>
>
Building it manually, I see this:
cd ./out-www; texi2pdf -I
/home/gperciva/src/lilypond/Documentation -I
/home/gperciva/src/lilypond/input/regression --quiet
collated-files.texi
Error (196): Command token too long
^Cmake[3]: *** Deleting file `out-www/collated-files.pdf'
/usr/bin/texi2dvi: pdfetex
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:39:20PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> > Well, I've not been able to nicely redo the merges (git !@#$!#). So I
> > just threw everything release-related out of staging. If you redo the
> > merge into staging and the version number bump in stag
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 09:03:30PM +, hashas...@gmail.com wrote:
> These are some results (not filtered) that show (if I did not grep wrong
> files) that there are more than just plain pdf or images being linked
> there.
Most of those are almost certainly internal links between web/ to
web/, s
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 07:19:55PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > No problem; I'm quite happy that Patchy is pulling his weight so
> > soon. :)
>
> Never mind Patchy... After the problematic commit, you made a release
> tag and ever
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 05:28:44PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Skimming through lily/GNUmakefile, this makes sense. There's a
> > couple of explicit dependencies for parser.hh, but these don't
> > mention lily-lexer-scheme.cc, w
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 04:17:23PM +, hashas...@gmail.com wrote:
> >2) I would not accept this solution even if it worked, because it
> involves weird
> >hard-coding for the old website.
>
> Agreed. But solves an issue that is hanging around for.. one year?
> I am not selling this as the salva
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 06:17:57AM -0800, Graham Percival wrote:
> That order of commands suggests that lily-lexer-scheme.cc does not
> depend on parser.cc. I see that it contains such an #include, so
> I would assume that make would catch it... but apparently not.
Skimming thr
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 01:35:27PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
> >> In file included from
> >> /home/jlowe/lilypond-git/lily/lily-lexer-scheme.cc:21:
> >> /home/jlowe/lilypond-git/lily/include/lily-lexer.hh:69: error: ISO C++
> >> forbids declaration of 'YYSTYPE' with n
On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 12:54:23PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Instead use
>
> git cl upload
>
> for it. I think the details should be in the Contributor's Guide.
The details are in the CG, the details are in exactly one of the
three pages I linked to in one of the emails I sent him, but he
e
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 02:19:49PM +, Alberto Simões wrote:
>
> On 12/21/11 13:56 , Graham Percival wrote:
> >I highly recommend that you read
> >http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/summary-for-experienced-developers
> >http://lilypond.org
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:22:11AM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> A general comment on changes to the build system. How do we know
> that there's been no unintended other effects of changes like this?
> I think it would be wise to work up a system of checking, by doing
> something like creating a lis
On Wed, Dec 21, 2011 at 09:29:31AM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> I'll hold on this one and look again once Julien's patch is pushed.
> As I said, it's almost inconceivable that there would be an error
> from texi2pdf causing the build to fail.
I've seen half a dozen in the past month. (my fault, it
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 12:23:07AM +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
> source-highlight -s lilypond.lang --style-file=lilypond.style -i
> test.ly -o test.html
Looks good, thanks for giving the exact command-line to use!
It might be nice to include an example of real lilypond code,
although people prob
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 08:54:04PM +0100, Hans Aberg wrote:
> >> LilyPond 2.15.22 works in the OS X 10.7.2 GUI. From Terminal, I use a
> >> script ~/bin/lilypond:
> >> exec /Applications/LilyPond.app/Contents/Resources/bin/lilypond "$@"
> >> On OS X 10.7 /usr/local/bin/ is in the path, so one ca
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 08:41:10PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> Yes, and things started to make a lot more sense once I made that connection.
> At some point in the new year I'll try to document what I learned
> about stepmake.
I trust that you've seen
Documentation/contributor/build-notes.itexi
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:33:15PM +, julien.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 2011/12/20 19:19:51, Graham Percival wrote:
> >Does stepmake/stepmake/texinfo-rules.make apply to translations? I
> thought
> >translations only used make/doc-whatever-i18n.
>
> Since very recent
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 07:25:20PM +, julien.ri...@gmail.com wrote:
> Documentation writers: Is it correct to say as a general rule that if a
> file has a .itexi extension, it does not contain @nodes?
No, not at all -- virtually all of our docs are in .itexi (or
.itely) files containing nodes.
On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 02:28:34PM -0500, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 18, 2011 at 2:08 PM, wrote:
> > LGTM, please send final patch for pushing directly to staging.
> >
> > http://codereview.appspot.com/5490064/
>
> Here here,
Thanks, finally pushed.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 02:52:34AM +, md5i.m...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> In point of fact, I found no additional errors when running make check.
> Please understand, though, that I have a 32-bit machine. Other warnings
> may pup up with a 64-bit compile.
hmm, was this with
-Wextra -Wconversion
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 05:06:49PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 4:49 PM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > Thanks, pushed. You're responsible for closing the issue.
>
> The google issue or the rietveld issue or both?
Both, but most importantly the goog
Thanks, pushed. You're responsible for closing the issue.
Cheers,
- Graham
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:14:38PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> Oops here's the patch.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2107
___
lilypond-devel mailing
Thanks, pushed. You're responsible for closing the issue.
Cheers,
- Graham
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:13:21PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> Final patch ready to push.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2103
___
lilypond-devel mail
Thanks, pushed. You're responsible for closing the issue.
Cheers,
- Graham
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:12:24PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> Final patch ready to push.
>
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2105
___
lilypond-devel mail
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 08:41:36PM +, benko@gmail.com wrote:
> patch rebased
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5434061/
Unless you use the new git-cl to upload it, nobody will notice
that you have updated your patch.
Go find the google code tracker issue, and manually change it from
Patc
On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 03:42:34PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>
> > In make, it it possible to output an informative string if part of the
> > make fails? As an example of why I'd like to know this, make doc uses
>
> You use the shell.
>
> texi2pdf whatever || { x=
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 08:04:49PM -0500, Michael Welsh Duggan wrote:
> I seem to recall that spaces were going to be used instead of tabs
> wherever possible in source files. Is there a reason that parser.yy
> uses tabs instead of spaces?
I didn't run astyle on parser.yy because the extension wa
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 08:21:32PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>
> > Yeah - warning: valgrind.h. No such file or directory.
>
> That's a _warning_ rather than an error? Crazy.
I'd be *overjoyed* to make patchy compile with -Werror, but it'll
probably take about 10 hour
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 06:04:36PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> "Phil Holmes" writes:
>
> > /home/phil/lilypond-git/lily/score-engraver.cc: In member function
> > virtual void Score_engraver::announce_grob(Grob_info)':
> > /home/phil/lilypond-git/lily/score-engraver.cc:164: error:
> > VALGRIND_P
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 06:21:45PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 12/17/11 10:31 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> >Dunno about Phil, but I'd define it as "an issue which has no Tiny
> >example".
>
> How about doc revisions? They have no tiny exampl
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 04:15:43PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On Dec 17, 2011, at 6:54 AM, "Phil Holmes" wrote:
>
> > On the tracker, we use labels to categorise issues. Is there any reason we
> > shouldn't use a specific label just for patches ("Patch")? This will make
> > it clearer t
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 03:50:55PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> I'd like to get rid of it. Options would appear to be:
>
> 1. Make a special case for output like this and redirect the stdout
> as well as stderr output to a logfile - currently I've not done this
> since for all the other files, it
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 01:53:49PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> On the tracker, we use labels to categorise issues. Is there any
> reason we shouldn't use a specific label just for patches ("Patch")?
> This will make it clearer to the Bug Squad how to verify - those
> labelled patch are verified wi
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 01:36:40PM +, pkx1...@gmail.com wrote:
> >We have a central place that gives the location of this dir for all
> operating
> >systems. Please link to that.
>
> I'm struggling to find it. Sorry.
Try this:
git grep "share/lilypond"
apparently it's in the Learning manua
This is an old, but good, article on bug handling. It just
occurred to me that maybe some people hadn't seen it before:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog29.html
Money quote (as far as I'm concerned):
A bug is like a hot potato: when it's assigned to you, you are
responsible t
On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 09:47:28PM +0100, Benkő Pál wrote:
> I haven't got any reaction whatsoever since three weeks:
> did I miss something?
> http://codereview.appspot.com/5434061/
You've missed this:
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/summary-for-experienced-developers
I'v
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 03:01:23PM +0100, Federico Bruni wrote:
> Which kind of work is involved?
python scripts.
> There's an issue about it on the tracker?
Probably not. I've pretty much abandoned adding Frog items,
really, since nobody pays attention to them.
> I can find just this:
> http:
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 04:04:07PM +0100, Julien Rioux wrote:
> Sure, here it is. Please test make doc before pushing.
Nah, no need. I've pushed it to origin/staging, which undergoes a
complete build (binaries, regtests, doc) from scratch every 6
hours. If there's no problems, it's automatically
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 11:36:06AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Well, I personally don't care. If somebody wants to work on
> > advertising, or even better, work on things which encourage other
> > people to do advertising for
On Wed, Dec 14, 2011 at 10:55:04AM +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
> > attract positive attention
>
> Are you sure?
It attracted positive attention on lilypond-user. I never s
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:52:41PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> lilypond.patchy.gra...@gmail.com writes:
>
> > *** FAILED STEP ***
> >
> > merge from staging
> >
> > maybe somebody pushed a commit directly to master?
>
> Nope. staging is strictly ahead of master.
>
> Lockfile problem o
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 07:06:56AM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
> FWIW, I've found that GUB on x86-64 Oneiric will choke building
> cross-compiled components, with error messages saying "unable to
> identify extension of x", where x is the x.o form of a tool. This
> points, according to GCC, to m
On Mon, Dec 12, 2011 at 04:22:59AM -0800, lilypond.patchy.gra...@gmail.com
wrote:
> *** FAILED BUILD ***
>
> nice make doc -j3 CPU_COUNT=3
>
> Previous good commit: f8e03b152b436d6034dd17e71335fc6221497571
>
> Current broken commit: 438084fc487d6e575500a4e2866ef750476ce6cf
Here's where we stand.
STABLE RELEASE
Almost everybody wants stable releases more frequently. They
attract positive attention, they get updated docs and bugfixes and
new features into the hands of users, etc. We had the first two
release candidates back in Sep. Unfortunately, we've had Critic
Here's a tip that is making its way into the rewritten CG: don't
leave your lilypond repository as "master" or "staging".
To see the branch, add this:
export PS1="\u@\h \w\$(__git_ps1)$ "
to your ~/.bashrc
(or just type it once to see what happens)
The general idea is that you should always see
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 03:30:04PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> I would actually prefer if people _never_ actually did any work on their
> own copy of staging.
+1
I've just added a
gitk
step in the "pushing to staging" instructions. In the next few
days I'll tackle the question of branching i
We've got a mess in master now, starting with
0f68a5a1b6f789c2a0ec0e4584a3495832a3b6d7
I noticed the problem before Patchy ran, but I assumed that the
merge --ff-only would reject the mess. Unfortunately it didn't,
so we now have a span of a few commits that will fail to compile,
as well as some
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 06:16:54AM -0600, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> It worked in a VM for me, hopefully it will for you too. One mistake I
> found is that the desktop launcher for the CG links to the 2.13
> version instead of 2.15 (*facepalm*). Forgot about that. I can fix and
> make a new image.
hol
On Sun, Dec 11, 2011 at 11:49:51AM +, James wrote:
>--snip--
>james@james-OptiPlex-990:~/Downloads$ md5sum
>ubuntu-lilydev-remix-2.0.iso ubuntu-lilydev-remix-2.0.iso.md5
>b394cb547a558559e21dfdaf702ebe01 ubuntu-lilydev-remix-2.0.iso
>4067a00cfe9d8dc501fbeb32ab8f3020 ubuntu
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 07:18:40AM -0600, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> Ok great. Compiling fontforge 20110222 with --enable-double now to
> test it. shouldn't take long to get new iso ready.
Forgive me if this is obvious, but have you done all the things
listed here?
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/is
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 07:01:27AM -0600, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 6:35 AM, Graham Percival
> wrote:
> > export LILYPOND_GIT=$HOME/lilypond-git/
> > export LILYPOND_WEB_MEDIA_GIT=$HOME/lilypond-web-media-git/
>
> Thanks, so I just add these to .bas
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 06:09:22AM -0600, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
>
> Ok I can make these changes to the current setup. Haven't heard of
> $LILYPOND_GIT but I guess it's in the CG so I'll take a look.
export LILYPOND_GIT=$HOME/lilypond-git/
export LILYPOND_WEB_MEDIA_GIT=$HOME/lilypond-web-media-git/
On Sat, Dec 10, 2011 at 11:18:22AM +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> On 10 December 2011 02:41, Graham Percival wrote:
> >
> > Seriously, Xavier. You should know how things work by now.
>
> Seriously, Graham. I sent a message to bug-lilypond three days ago.
Then you could c
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 11:21:25PM +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> I am surprised no developer replied to this message.
> This is a wise suggestion and would be very helpful for many users.
That's a feature request from at least 7 years ago. It's not at
all new. If you want to get it "in the syst
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:35:36AM -0600, Jonathan Kulp wrote:
> I could probably do it again. Maybe Debian would be better base so it
> wouldn't need upgrading as much?
This upgrade is to match our changing development requirements,
i.e. fontforge 20110222 --enable-double, astyle 2.02, having the
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 01:34:20PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> You have to _remove_ staging, then push a new version (use the path
> refs/heads/staging for the creating push since git can't guess that
> "staging" is a shorthand for that when it no longer exists).
ok, thanks. Done, and I've manu
whoops, I forgot that I had to always do
touch ../Documentation/*.te??
before make would actually compile stuff. As a result, staging is
broken.
I want to remove
9eb76031c027ffdccd2ea5cf86985617a00982b7
however, how do I do that? I know that I can force push
975c00a63710da2472f57fbb6d5a48454
On Fri, Dec 09, 2011 at 10:06:53AM +, Colin Hall wrote:
> > It seems that in "2.15.20" the arpeggio is part of the NoteColumn. (But not
> > the DotColumn or the AccidentalPlacement)
> > The IR 3.2.71 note-column-interface states only stems and noteheads.
>
> I'm unable to determine if this is
I think it's time to get this moving:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1964
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/building-an-ubuntu-distro
Who's up for it?
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-d
Hi all,
Following a few weeks of private discussions, I have added a page
for sponsorships / bounties:
http://lilypond.org/sponsoring.html
We may be making some small tweaks to the text on that page, and
also some changes to the gitstats are on the way.
People are welcome to add themselves to the
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 12:25:04PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> git rev-list -1 --until="1 year ago" origin
Excellent, thanks!
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-d
On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at 12:08:30PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > ~/src/lilypond$ git rev-parse "origin/master@{3 months ago}"
> > 95fab3ca9692b197c2a26c5249d7f30b114ab451
> >
>
> Uh, @ specifications are for the _reflog_.
The command for 3 months ago is happy, but not the one for a year:
~/src/lilypond$ git rev-parse "origin/master@{3 months ago}"
95fab3ca9692b197c2a26c5249d7f30b114ab451
~/src/lilypond$ git rev-parse "origin/master@{1 year ago}"
warning: Log for 'origin/master' only goes back to Mon, 29 Aug
2011
On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 11:39:03AM +0100, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> Le Dec 4, 2011 à 11:27 AM, Graham Percival a écrit :
>
> > This is *NOT* directed at programmers. Programmers should keep on
> > programming. This is directed at users.
>
> I think this is a gr
On Sun, Dec 04, 2011 at 11:00:31AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> James writes:
>
> > As has always been stated, no is asking for documentation tracker
> > entries to be 'verbatim and polished or even complete' when they are
> > created, but it sure would help if 'something' was added - even if it
I'm satisfied with the automatic handling of staging->master, so I
will now be working on automatic handling of patch-new issues. It
was working in 90% of cases when I left it a month ago, so it
shouldn't be too bad.
James: thanks for your efforts on this; you may now stop.
Colin: please contin
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 03:02:42PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 12/3/11 7:38 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>
> >James writes:
> >
> >> Nothing sinister about it, and am happy to revert it but don't
> >> understand why this is bad. Sure the new example is much 'simpler'
> >> than having write a
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 10:51:49AM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> My (simple) workflow is that I use lily-git to
> pull, make my changes, use lily-git to commit and create a patch,
> then I usually abort my changes. I then use command line to fetch
> staging, apply my patch and push to staging, using
On Sat, Dec 03, 2011 at 04:05:45AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> On 12/2/11 9:01 PM, "gra...@percival-music.ca"
> wrote:
> >However, perhaps we need to explain this (and modify lily-git.tcl).
> >I'll take a look at lily-git.tcl and see how hard it would be to modify
> >it.
>
> We can make lily-gi
We've have two changes to the configure script, so please:
1. completely remove your build directory
2. go to your lilypond git dir, and run:
./autogen.sh --noconfigure
3. then run:
mkdir -p build/
cd build
../configure
If you do not follow those instructions, and end up with build
problem
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 05:28:37PM -0500, Julien Rioux wrote:
> This is a sequential make and make doc. The latter stops with the
> error message given below. Extract_texi_filename is the last thing
> that runs correctly and then make tries to copy a file from the
> build dir instead of the source
Ok, I'm back in civilization, I've spent the weekend doing
renovation both in terms of furniture, computer hardware, and
computer software. Two hard drives (850 megs and 5 gigs) have
been demolished in my quest for powerful household magnets, and I
have a new mac mini with ubuntu, which puts me in
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 04:09:48AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> I backed out all of the jazz chord changes. Since they were last in
> staging, this did not actually require a rebase. This should likely be
> pretty painless. It does have the disadvantage that anybody who already
> fetched them c
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 03:41:25AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > 2) remove that commit, then rebase origin/staging on the result.
> >
> > I'm not comfortable rewriting history on a shared repository.
>
> I'll do the second o
Compile of staging dies due to:
baf650c616cf73ab8ee47e28b298f7d7e1336867
Author: Adam Spiers 2011-07-28 00:51:12
Committer: Adam Spiers 2011-11-28
09:31:44
Parent: c8e6f4dbdbe2932504aa294394862728cff0ba5c (Replace tabs
with spaces in scm/chord-ignatzek-names.scm)
Child: baf650c616cf73ab8ee47
On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 09:11:59PM +, James wrote:
> Patchy's younger sister 'Patchita' failed to 'make' on staging this evening.
WTM is Patchita?
> Previous good commit: 91f314bea692ffb82a2c784cfbf8e339f2c12580
> Current broken commit: 45b219221124f4d7b977a1a0b1e489c47bb3ac02
I'm not certai
901 - 1000 of 6084 matches
Mail list logo
