Re: new website (general info)

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 07:00:57PM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote: > 2009/6/9 Graham Percival : > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:22:53PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > > That can, and will, be changed with CSS.  The basic content > > doesn't dictate the slickness of the presentation! > > Can HTML pag

Re: new website (general info)

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 01:44:05AM +0200, John Mandereau wrote: > Graham Percival a écrit : >> Despite that, I must admit that I misremembered the previous >> discussion about the website. I thought we'd all agreed on >> texi, but reading the discussion now, I see that opinions were all >> over th

Re: new website (general info)

Graham Percival a écrit : Despite that, I must admit that I misremembered the previous discussion about the website. I thought we'd all agreed on texi, but reading the discussion now, I see that opinions were all over the map. :| IIRC there was some consensus about writing some documents i

Re: development on windows

On Sat, Jun 06, 2009 at 10:43:56PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote: > On Sat, Jun 6, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Graham Percival > wrote: > > Err... "GUB" stands for "Grand Unified Binary".  It was a play on > > the GUT (Grand Unified Theory) of physics. > > Interesting. So did the name evolve over time? Now

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 03:56:25PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Wow, should have read those. I guess you can pretty much do what you > want, however, a few things really strike me as odd or unwise > >DON'T TOUCH STABLE/2.12. > > why create a "stable/2.12" branch and then not use it and d

Re: unable to make doc

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:29:57PM +0200, Jean-Charles Malahieude wrote: > The two "corresponding files might be > input/regression/profile-property-access.ly > > input/lsr/utf-8.ly Those two files include non-Western fonts (such as Hebrew and Japanese). Do you have all the extra (international)

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:27:49PM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote: > This is driving me mad. I think that, with the new policy of > committing our own changes to input/lsr it is impossible to avoid > conflicts between lilypond/translation and master. ... > But now comes the issue of LSR, whose policy

unable to make doc

Hi all, Even with a fresh downloaded git, I'm unable to successfully build the docs and don't understand the reason why. The two "corresponding files might be input/regression/profile-property-access.ly not able to know why, since the "snippet" part of out/lybook-db/d6/lily-50e2bfee i

Re: translation of the doc into italian

On 6/9/09 10:39 AM, "Federico Bruni" wrote: > Hi all, > > as far as I can see there is not an italian documentation for lilypond. > > I'd like to help with that, could you please tell me how can I contribute? > If other italians want to join, either for just proofreading or > translating als

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

Op dinsdag 09-06-2009 om 07:12 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Graham Percival: > Dunno. Is this an automatic tagging? I'm still trying to figure > out what branch/tags are done automatically by GUB. Release tags are inserted by GUB. Branching is done manually, developers must decide to what bra

Re: new website (general info)

2009/6/9 Francisco Vila : > Can HTML pages produced with texi2html have arbitrary > or tags? Are they easily produced from the > texinfo source? If so, you are right and all that is feasible in > CSSZenGarden --for example-- from the very same source is also > feasible for us by changing _only_ t

Re: new website (general info)

2009/6/9 Graham Percival : > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:22:53PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Graham >> Percival wrote: >> > In the hopes of convincing Han-Wen that we should include the >> > website in the main branch, I've done my first pass at rearranging >>

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:53:55PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Graham > Percival wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:15:36PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > >> This is completely backwards: the definition of a stable release (or > >> rather: stable branch),

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:35 PM, Graham Percival wrote: > Err, did you send this privately deliberately? > > > On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:15:36PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Graham >> Percival wrote: >> > That's true.  However, I chose to avoid having bugfixes

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

[oops - forgot the list] On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:15 PM, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 11:36 AM, Graham > Percival wrote: >> On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 08:07:57AM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote: >>> >>> On 6/9/09 7:56 AM, "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" wrote: >>> >>> > I propose to release a

Re: new website (general info)

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 12:22:53PM -0300, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Graham > Percival wrote: > > In the hopes of convincing Han-Wen that we should include the > > website in the main branch, I've done my first pass at rearranging > > it.  You can see it in the web-g

Re: new website (general info)

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Graham Percival wrote: > In the hopes of convincing Han-Wen that we should include the > website in the main branch, I've done my first pass at rearranging > it.  You can see it in the web-gop/ branch (cd texinfo && make), > or here: > > http://percival-music.ca/blo

new website (general info)

In the hopes of convincing Han-Wen that we should include the website in the main branch, I've done my first pass at rearranging it. You can see it in the web-gop/ branch (cd texinfo && make), or here: http://percival-music.ca/blogfiles/lilypond-general.pdf http://percival-music.ca/blogfiles/out/

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 08:07:57AM -0600, Carl D. Sorensen wrote: > > On 6/9/09 7:56 AM, "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" wrote: > > > I propose to release a buildable 2.12.3 tarball, and to have name a > > stable and a development branch. Numbering isn't all that interesting, > > but linux also has that: y

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 03:56:25PM +0200, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Op dinsdag 09-06-2009 om 07:16 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Carl D. > Sorensen: > > > There was an announced policy of rapid releases that discouraged spending > > time on backporting, since we were going to move forward more ra

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On 6/9/09 7:56 AM, "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" wrote: > Op dinsdag 09-06-2009 om 07:16 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Carl D. > Sorensen: > >> There was an announced policy of rapid releases that discouraged spending >> time on backporting, since we were going to move forward more rapidly on >> releas

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

Op dinsdag 09-06-2009 om 07:16 uur [tijdzone -0600], schreef Carl D. Sorensen: > There was an announced policy of rapid releases that discouraged spending > time on backporting, since we were going to move forward more rapidly on > releasing new stable branches. > >

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 5:12 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote: > Op maandag 08-06-2009 om 17:12 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Jan > Nieuwenhuizen: > >> As it turns out after discussing with Han-Wen, it seems that >> 2.12.2 was released from MASTER after stable/2.12 was branched. >> Don't ever do that! ;-

Re: tagging 2.13.1

On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 7:47 AM, Francisco Vila wrote: > Along with tagging+releasing, wouldn't be great to know which commit > does a release come from, just making the build process to write it > down in a README file? Nowadays, tagging is a manual event that can be > forgotten (and it is). No, i

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

On 6/9/09 2:12 AM, "Jan Nieuwenhuizen" wrote: > > ... the stable branch that I now recreated, from master > at tag release/2.12.2-1, *was* that actually bugfixing, > cautious development? > Or does our 2.12.2 release include new, risky development? As far as I know, 2.12.2 has no new, risky

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

2009/6/9 John Mandereau : > Except that I've been more idle on merging lately, not only because I've > been busy, but because I described the merging policy in the Contributors' > Guide and at least you are able to apply it. Yes but it is still a bit difficult to see the whole frame, I'm sorry. >

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

2009/6/9 John Mandereau : > Francisco Vila a écrit : >> >> BTW is it possible that branches have diverged because of the >> breakdown of savannah, and I am having conflicts despite of branches >> having been merged recently? IIRC git told me exactly that but I >> ignored it. > > It's possible. Did

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

Francisco Vila a écrit : BTW is it possible that branches have diverged because of the breakdown of savannah, and I am having conflicts despite of branches having been merged recently? IIRC git told me exactly that but I ignored it. It's possible. Did you pull master with -r flag before changin

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

Francisco Vila a écrit : This is driving me mad. I think that, with the new policy of committing our own changes to input/lsr it is impossible to avoid conflicts between lilypond/translation and master. It's not impossible, but it is more difficult... :-/ more below. Besides, frequent mer

Re: tagging 2.13.1

Along with tagging+releasing, wouldn't be great to know which commit does a release come from, just making the build process to write it down in a README file? Nowadays, tagging is a manual event that can be forgotten (and it is). Also, it would be useful to know what commit has a webpage been pro

Re: Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

BTW is it possible that branches have diverged because of the breakdown of savannah, and I am having conflicts despite of branches having been merged recently? IIRC git told me exactly that but I ignored it. I am going to fetch a fresh repo to be sure (if and only if the repo now in savannah is san

Conflicts, conflicts everywhere

This is driving me mad. I think that, with the new policy of committing our own changes to input/lsr it is impossible to avoid conflicts between lilypond/translation and master. Sooner or later, all the changes and updates made to the lilypond/translation branch will have to be merged into master,

Re: stable/2.12 and tagging of tarballs

Op maandag 08-06-2009 om 17:12 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Jan Nieuwenhuizen: > As it turns out after discussing with Han-Wen, it seems that > 2.12.2 was released from MASTER after stable/2.12 was branched. > Don't ever do that! ;-) Looking further into this, I found that our lilypond-2.12.2 ta