Also, if you're messing with the docs a lot, I can recommend to also
test your changes with GUB, which is how all the releases are built.
I can help you set it up, if you like.
2008/3/7, Han-Wen Nienhuys <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hi John,
>
> can you have a look at this? This prevents me from rele
Hi John,
can you have a look at this? This prevents me from releasing 2.11.42.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] topdocs]$ make out/NEWS.txt
make: *** No rule to make target `out/NEWS.txt'. Stop.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] topdocs]$ make out/NEWS.texi
make: *** No rule to make target `out/NEWS.texi'. Stop.
FWIW, I t
2008/3/4, Reinhold Kainhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> > Okay, I now took a look at the code and in Tuplet_number::print, there is a
> > hardcoded check that kills the tuplet number if the tuplet "does not take
> > up any time". In my eyes, this is wrong, since then there is no visual
> > in
LGTM
(googleese for: looks good to me.)
2008/2/26, Reinhold Kainhofer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Okay to apply?
--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://list
Hi,
Based on the recent discussions on automatic beaming, I got an idea on
a possible improvement/simplification.
Currently, a setting like
#(override-auto-beam-setting '(end 1 16 4 4) 1 4)
means that beams are ended on the first beat if the beamed notes are
16th notes.
What if we changed the i
2008/3/5, Mats Bengtsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Your attempt can be simplified, see below. However, after having tried it
> on a simple example, I'm no longer so convinced that it's a good idea, since
> you typically might want the notes before the breath to be beamed together,
> whereas the (eq
Arvid Grøtting wrote:
"Valentin Villenave" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Yes. So long for implementing this in the sources; nevertheless I'll
add it to the LSR anyway... unless you have another idea how LilyPond
could do that in a smarter way?
Is it possible to let auto-beaming be per
