It's not clear why you are now mixing in variants of conversion rules for issue 4372. There already is a more thorough conversion rule for issue 4372 in review and I don't see any comment of yours on it. While there may have been some overlap in effort, it does not make sense to mix that issue with this one.
But at any rate I think you need to explain why you think that you want a convert-ly rule to retain behavior that you consider a) to not correspond to the documentation or expected behavior b) to not deserve a command of its own c) you do not consider worth documenting separately d) which requires explicit protection of the documentation from conversion Adding a convert-ly rule here makes no sense in connection with the rationale with which the change was done in the first place. All the cleanup required to let LilyPond itself escape unscathed from the conversion should be a red flag that it was not a good idea to start with. https://codereview.appspot.com/190500043/ _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
