On 2012/01/11 11:45:19, J_lowe wrote:
I've created
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2213 so I'll work
on the NR as I did all the \footnote Doc in the first place.
I am assuming you still have to include your documentation edits in
the patch so that the docs compile? Nope, the last batch of running convert-ly appears to cover this. The documentation compiles, it just talks nonsense in the text.
On a 'merging' note, should I take the diff file from this tracker for
the input.itely and use that as my base so that I don't end up with 'unable to apply' patch type messages on myside if I work from the *itely as it is in master? Since I don't expect significant changes anymore, this sounds reasonable. If you wanted to be safer than that, your patch would have to be sorted into the series _before_ running update-with-convert-ly. But I would prefer doing the two steps in this review as a single commit, and if we bounce the doc changes between our private repositories, this will just complicate matters. http://codereview.appspot.com/5527058/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
