> Personally, I do not think that there will be a big public interest in
> the history of lilypond bugs. What I believe could be interesting, is the
> set of open bugs, and the set of very recently closed bugs. I.e. what will be
> in CVS with my latest suggestion.
I disagree. Think you were a fun
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 01:58:08PM -0300, Pedro Kroger wrote:
> http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/gnu-guile-projects.html
>
> "snd" uses guile heavily, for sure as extensively as lilypond. I don't
> know about the others.
The big difference between LilyPond and Snd is: LilyPond itself is
partiall
On Tue, Jun 01, 2004 at 08:09:22PM +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> > Just curious: Is there any other project which uses Guile as
> > extensively as LilyPond? I would like to have a comparison.
>
> Not sure. You might want to look at Gnucash and texmacs. Also, I
> believe GUILE is the primary
The title says it all.
Pedro
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
On Tuesday 01 June 2004 18.50, Pedro Kroger wrote:
> * Erik Sandberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > I have 2 suggestions here (which are more food for thought than
> > opinions): 1. How about adding two metapackages 'lilypond-stable' and
> > 'lilypond-unstable' (or whatever the names would be), dep
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> Just curious: Is there any other project which uses Guile as
> extensively as LilyPond? I would like to have a comparison.
Not sure. You might want to look at Gnucash and texmacs. Also, I
believe GUILE is the primary platform for common music/notation
nowadays, bu
* Werner LEMBERG ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Just curious: Is there any other project which uses Guile as
> extensively as LilyPond? I would like to have a comparison.
The guile webpage lists quite a few:
http://www.gnu.org/software/guile/gnu-guile-projects.html
"snd" uses guile heavily, for s
* Erik Sandberg ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I have 2 suggestions here (which are more food for thought than opinions):
> 1. How about adding two metapackages 'lilypond-stable' and
> 'lilypond-unstable' (or whatever the names would be), depending on the
latest
> lilypondX.Y package? This would el
> Since all developers should have the latest lilypond versions, they
> will not add any bugs to the database, that don't exist in the
> latest lilypond version. Thus there is no risk of reporting bugs
> the same bugs again and again.
I don't insist on a ChangeLog if you think that you can manag
On Monday 31 May 2004 17.32, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> > I can imagine that there could be a quick & dirty fix for this particular
> > problem (check if lyricsto happened to add an extra bar, and if it did,
> > remove it). If this isn't going to be done, then I'd conside
On Tuesday 01 June 2004 01.27, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> > > I strongly suggest to start a ChangeLog file to document changes
> > > in the repository, mainly to avoid reporting the same errors again
> > > and again.
> >
> > I think there's a simpler solution than using a ChangeLog.
> >
> > One is to
Just curious: Is there any other project which uses Guile as
extensively as LilyPond? I would like to have a comparison.
Werner
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
> > I strongly suggest to start a ChangeLog file to document changes
> > in the repository, mainly to avoid reporting the same errors again
> > and again.
>
> I think there's a simpler solution than using a ChangeLog.
>
> One is to use the convention that bugs are removed only directly
> after t
13 matches
Mail list logo
