Re: sending git patches

Hi, On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, Graham Percival wrote: > Suppose that a nice helpful GDP helper has git working. They make some > changes, commit stuff, make more changes, commit more. Now what's the > best way for them to send these changes to me? > > (assuming that they don't have write access to

sending git patches

Suppose that a nice helpful GDP helper has git working. They make some changes, commit stuff, make more changes, commit more. Now what's the best way for them to send these changes to me? (assuming that they don't have write access to the repository) I know that git has a huge number of git-

GDP: learning manual

Another poorly-explained idea is the split between the Learning Manual and the Notation Reference. I've expanded parts of the LM now, so it should hopefully be a bit more clear. As always, the latest docs are there: http://opihi.cs.uvic.ca/~gperciva/ Please note that I am not looking for hel

GDP: Pitches rewrite draft

Ok, let's start the other half of real GDP work (two halves: formatting and rewriting) by examining Pitches. As always, please examine the latest docs here: http://opihi.cs.uvic.ca/~gperciva/ DON'T BOTHER COMMENTING - inspirational headword will be reinstated on 1 Jan 2008. - tables in "Note nam

GDP: main phase

We have now entered the main phase of GDP. I seem to have done a poor job of explaining what's happening, so I'll try to explain it better. Please read this message carefully. If something in this message contradicts anything I said in the past couple of days, please treat this message as corre

lilypond doc bugs

There are three bugs that are particularly annoying from a documentation maintenance perspective: http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=268 http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=483 http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=485 These aren't urgent by any means

Re: Git strategy for GDP

John Mandereau wrote: 1) We keep both branches independent, and we'll rebase lilypond/gdp on top of master after stable/2.12 has been derived from master. This will require reverting in master some translations and possible doc fixes that were/will be committed to both master and lilypond/gdp, j

Re: GDP: identifiers = ick

Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: 2007/9/28, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: I thought that "macro" was safer, since we can't redefine variables. Actually, you can, afaik. Wow, we can! Ok, that settles this debate; "variables" it is. Cheers, - Graham __

Re: GDP: atomic music expressions

2007/9/28, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Is this technically a "music expression" ? > c'4 Yes. Just like 1 is mathematical expression (albeit a very simple one.) -- Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen __

Re: GDP: identifiers = ick

2007/9/28, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > Identifier isn't a good term either, that is the term for the lexical > > function ("an identifier a sequence of letters"). > > > > Perhaps we should just 'variable' > > I thought that "macro" was safer, since we can't re

GDP: three additional instructions for helpers

As an aside, I'm starting every email with "GDP: " in the subject line so that people can easily filter them. If you care about GDP, make a new mailbox for these emails; if you don't care about it, then send all these emails straight to the trash. :) I've added some more instructions to the

Re: Git strategy for GDP

Hi, On Sat, 29 Sep 2007, John Mandereau wrote: > 1) We keep both branches independent, and we'll rebase lilypond/gdp on > top of master after stable/2.12 has been derived from master. This will > require reverting in master some translations and possible doc fixes > that were/will be committe

Git strategy for GDP

Hi, As this issue appeared in a recent discussion onthe list, I wonder about how to handle lilypond/gdp and master branches. I see two possible options: 1) We keep both branches independent, and we'll rebase lilypond/gdp on top of master after stable/2.12 has been derived from master. This will

Re: GDP: documentation guidelines

Le vendredi 28 septembre 2007 à 20:15 -0700, Graham Percival a écrit : > John Mandereau wrote: > > There's no need to add README.txt to the compiled docs, as we can > > directly refer to the sources: > > http://git.sv.gnu.org/gitweb/?p=lilypond.git;a=blob_plain;f=Documentation/user/README.txt;hb=li

Re: GDP: add "extender line" to the glossary?

At least for the German translation I had really problems finding a word for that -- I think it is still untranslated... Is there any real term for this that could then also be translated easily? On the other hand -- so far we have this term, so it really should show up in the glossary if transl

Re: GDP: identifiers = ick

2007/9/29, Graham Percival <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Intuitively, forgetting about any computer or math courses, I find > myself wanting to call them "variables". If somebody is trying to cause > trouble, they might complain that they can't change their values, but > I'll stick a sentence in the doc