On Fri, Apr 01, 2011 at 09:06:03AM -0700, Mark Polesky wrote: > Even if the discussion is fresh on the mailing > list, if you're starting a new thread, leave some > breadcrumbs. Someone "from the outside" wanting to help out > will be able to jump in more easily.
Yes. I just spent 2 weeks doing "only" 5-ish hours a week on lilypond, and I was already starting to lose track of things. For people "from the outside", I heartily recommend the links given in: http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/Documentation/contributor/summary-of-project-status and maybe: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/list?can=2&q=label:patch&sort=patch > Another note: I see some discussion in the comments > regarding my idiosyncratic use of @lilypond[] options, and > set-default-paper-size, etc. I do recall putting those in > for good reason, It's because you can't show most \paper{} options unless you use a \book{}, but using a \book{} by default creates an entire a4 page. > but now I regret not commenting them. I > have a vague memory that these choices were based on > comparing the results in both the html and the pdf output. > Have you checked both? I'm trying to get James to do some serious investigations of this (with a seperate .texi file rather than recompiling the docs), and to come up with general page sizes for the output, but so far he keeps on finding other things to look at (like translations). I want to get rid of all of those, and only allow stuff like: @lilypond[quote,verbatim,papersize=c4env] % show default tagline \book{ \score { \relative c' { c4 } } } @end lilypond (replace "c4env" with whatever papersize we end up deciding on) Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
