Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 2:59 PM Thomas Morley wrote: > Am Sa., 20. Juni 2020 um 17:18 Uhr schrieb Ralph Palmer > : > > > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 6:28 AM Karlin High > wrote: > >> > >> On 6/20/2020 7:37 AM, Thomas Morley wrote: > >> > I'd say we need more people for LSR-work. > >> > > >> > Furthermore, some time ago I started to upgrade LSR to 2.20, but had > >> > to stop this work as well. > >> > No idea, when I'm able to continue... > >> > >> Can the work be described in step-by-step instructions? If so, it could > >> be a good fit for crowd-sourcing. > >> -- > >> Karlin High > >> Missouri, USA > >> > > > > I have limited time, but would be willing to help, if the upgrade and/or > general LSR work can be done in small batches. > > > > All the best, > > > > Ralph > > > > -- > > Ralph Palmer > > Brattleboro, VT > > USA > > (he, him, his) > > palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com > > Hi Ralph, hi Karlin, > > sorry for the late reply. At least summer break started today !! > > Basically updating the LSR is done like: > > (1) Download LSR, apply convert-ly and try to compile all snippets > with most recent stable, i.e. 2.20.0 > (2) Find problems and fix them > (3) Work together with LSR-admin: he will update LSR to use current > stable, negotiate how the updated snippets will reinserted. > (4) Where possible insert snippets from Documentation/snippets/new > into updated LSR > > The whole process is explained more detailed in > > http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor-big-page#updating-the-lsr-to-a-new-version > > (2) and (4) can be done snippet by snippet > At any rate, I don't expect much work with (2). Earlier this year > Werner did a lot clean up and before I had to stop I cleared most (but > not all) other problems. I posted about those remaining ones, perhaps > I can find the links again... > Ofcourse some more snippets arrived in the meantime... > > I'll have a look later this week. > > > Thanks, > Harm > Thanks, Harm - I'll see what I can do. Please don't hold your breath. I'm sort of up to my ears at the moment, but I'll take a closer look and try to make a start as soon as I can catch my breath. All the best, Ralph -- Ralph Palmer Brattleboro, VT USA (he, him, his) palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
Am Sa., 20. Juni 2020 um 17:18 Uhr schrieb Ralph Palmer : > > On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 6:28 AM Karlin High wrote: >> >> On 6/20/2020 7:37 AM, Thomas Morley wrote: >> > I'd say we need more people for LSR-work. >> > >> > Furthermore, some time ago I started to upgrade LSR to 2.20, but had >> > to stop this work as well. >> > No idea, when I'm able to continue... >> >> Can the work be described in step-by-step instructions? If so, it could >> be a good fit for crowd-sourcing. >> -- >> Karlin High >> Missouri, USA >> > > I have limited time, but would be willing to help, if the upgrade and/or > general LSR work can be done in small batches. > > All the best, > > Ralph > > -- > Ralph Palmer > Brattleboro, VT > USA > (he, him, his) > palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com Hi Ralph, hi Karlin, sorry for the late reply. At least summer break started today !! Basically updating the LSR is done like: (1) Download LSR, apply convert-ly and try to compile all snippets with most recent stable, i.e. 2.20.0 (2) Find problems and fix them (3) Work together with LSR-admin: he will update LSR to use current stable, negotiate how the updated snippets will reinserted. (4) Where possible insert snippets from Documentation/snippets/new into updated LSR The whole process is explained more detailed in http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.19/Documentation/contributor-big-page#updating-the-lsr-to-a-new-version (2) and (4) can be done snippet by snippet At any rate, I don't expect much work with (2). Earlier this year Werner did a lot clean up and before I had to stop I cleared most (but not all) other problems. I posted about those remaining ones, perhaps I can find the links again... Ofcourse some more snippets arrived in the meantime... I'll have a look later this week. Thanks, Harm
Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
On Sat, Jun 20, 2020 at 6:28 AM Karlin High wrote: > On 6/20/2020 7:37 AM, Thomas Morley wrote: > > I'd say we need more people for LSR-work. > > > > Furthermore, some time ago I started to upgrade LSR to 2.20, but had > > to stop this work as well. > > No idea, when I'm able to continue... > > Can the work be described in step-by-step instructions? If so, it could > be a good fit for crowd-sourcing. > -- > Karlin High > Missouri, USA > > I have limited time, but would be willing to help, if the upgrade and/or general LSR work can be done in small batches. All the best, Ralph -- Ralph Palmer Brattleboro, VT USA (he, him, his) palmer.r.vio...@gmail.com
Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
On 6/20/2020 7:37 AM, Thomas Morley wrote: I'd say we need more people for LSR-work. Furthermore, some time ago I started to upgrade LSR to 2.20, but had to stop this work as well. No idea, when I'm able to continue... Can the work be described in step-by-step instructions? If so, it could be a good fit for crowd-sourcing. -- Karlin High Missouri, USA
Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
Am Fr., 19. Juni 2020 um 22:57 Uhr schrieb Valentin Villenave : > > On 6/19/20, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: > The LSR is only tended to by “Thomas Morley” and myself these days > (and unlike him, I am doing a lousy job of it), Well, I can't say I'm doing it better. In times of Corona my workload exploded, eating up all my time reserved to participate on -devel, -bug or -user. But even before, I wasn't really monitoring new snippets, only occasionally... I'd say we need more people for LSR-work. Furthermore, some time ago I started to upgrade LSR to 2.20, but had to stop this work as well. No idea, when I'm able to continue... > Actually, sending an e-mail to either of us or on -user is also a > great way to get our attention, as you can see here :-) > > Thanks for your contribution! +1 Cheers, Harm
Re: How to submit improved LSR entry?
On 6/19/20, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote: > But this seems not to have been taken up for the database, neither as an > addition nor as a replacement for 792 (see > http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Search?q=clef+change). > Did I do something wrong? No, you did everything right (TBH, you could also have added the “correction wanted” tag but that’s not what prevented your contribution from being taken into account). I’ve merged your corrections into 792 and deleted 1109 (I could have left it unapproved but that’s just likely to create further confusion down the line). The LSR is only tended to by “Thomas Morley” and myself these days (and unlike him, I am doing a lousy job of it), and since there’s no notification system we have to remember to check it out regularly for new snippets (which are marked as “unapproved” by default -- that is why your new snippet didn’t appear in the search results), verify their tags, and either approve them or merge them into an existing snippet when, as in this case, they’re intended as a correction. Actually, sending an e-mail to either of us or on -user is also a great way to get our attention, as you can see here :-) Thanks for your contribution! Cheers, -- V.
How to submit improved LSR entry?
Folks,
some months ago I tried to improve an LSR snippet
(http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=792 "Clef change at the beginning of
a piece"); namely, I added support for the use of key signatures which
the original LSR solution messes up (*).
Following the instructions in
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/html/contributing.html, I posted a new
snippet (http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=1109 "Clef change at the
beginning of a piece [corrected, now prints key signatures correctly]").
But this seems not to have been taken up for the database, neither as an
addition nor as a replacement for 792 (see
http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Search?q=clef+change).
Did I do something wrong?
Lukas
(*) For those who want to see the problem in the original version:
%% http://lsr.di.unimi.it/LSR/Item?id=792
%% see also
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/notation/displaying-pitches
% Append markup in the text property to the grob
#(define (append-markup grob old-stencil)
(ly:stencil-combine-at-edge
old-stencil X RIGHT (ly:text-interface::print grob)))
trebleToBass = {
\clef bass
% Fake staff clef appearance
\once \override Staff.Clef.glyph-name = #"clefs.G"
\once \override Staff.Clef.Y-offset = #-1
% Append change clef to the time signature
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature.text = \markup {
\hspace #1.2
\raise #1
\musicglyph #"clefs.F_change"
}
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature.stencil = #(lambda (grob)
(append-markup grob (ly:time-signature::print grob)))
}
bassToTreble = {
\clef treble
% Fake staff clef appearance
\once \override Staff.Clef.glyph-name = #"clefs.F"
\once \override Staff.Clef.Y-offset = #1
% Append change clef to the time signature
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature.text = \markup {
\hspace #1.2
\lower #1
\musicglyph #"clefs.G_change"
}
\once \override Staff.TimeSignature.stencil = #(lambda (grob)
(append-markup grob (ly:time-signature::print grob)))
}
\relative c {
\key f \major % Not in original LSR entry
\trebleToBass
c4 d e f
% This should not be visible
\clef bass
g a b c
% This should be visible
\clef treble
d e f g
}
