On 2009-09-07, Joe Neeman wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 01:05 +0100, Graham Percival wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> > > In light of recent suggestions to change LilyPond's copyright to GPLv2
> > > or later, I am reminded of the Ghostscript 8.70 announ
On Tue, 2009-09-08 at 01:05 +0100, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> > In light of recent suggestions to change LilyPond's copyright to GPLv2
> > or later, I am reminded of the Ghostscript 8.70 announcement to
> > gs-devel back in July.
> >
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 8. September 2009 01:19:11 schrieb Graham Percival:
> I'm looking at automatically replacing download links in
> general.texi (and subfiles) with macros. I think that's the best
> way to deal with them; we already have the @version macro
On 2009-09-08, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> > In light of recent suggestions to change LilyPond's copyright to GPLv2
> > or later, I am reminded of the Ghostscript 8.70 announcement to
> > gs-devel back in July.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
>
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 04:42:07PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> In light of recent suggestions to change LilyPond's copyright to GPLv2
> or later, I am reminded of the Ghostscript 8.70 announcement to
> gs-devel back in July.
>
> Thoughts?
Yes. My thoughts are "could people reading the maoing
Hi,
In light of recent suggestions to change LilyPond's copyright to GPLv2
or later, I am reminded of the Ghostscript 8.70 announcement to
gs-devel back in July.
It is here:
http://www.ghostscript.com/pipermail/gs-devel/2009-July/008545.html
The part that (I think) is relevant to LilyPond is
I'm looking at automatically replacing download links in
general.texi (and subfiles) with macros. I think that's the best
way to deal with them; we already have the @version macro that's
auto-generated.
@version is defined from TOPLEVEL_VERSION, which in turn is
defined from TOPLEVEL_MAJOR_VERSIO
Kieren MacMillan wrote Monday, September 07, 2009 7:40 PM
which works fine, if I understand what you want. So I was
wondering if Trevor was referring to something else...
Yes, I was thinking more of \lyricsto, which
needs a named context, and perhaps SATB on
two staves. I originally place
2009/9/7 Neil Puttock :
> I'm just trying to do a binary search to work out when this broke.
Found it. It's Joe's empty barline fix (#462).
I thought setting protected-scheme-parsing to #f might cause the
regression tests to break for this snippet, but it carries on merrily
to the end.
Regards
2009/9/7 Patrick McCarty :
> I did a completely clean build yesterday, so I don't think this is the
> problem.
Hmm, this is weird; I also did a clean build last night, and there's
no image for this regtest in the collated files (it's also missing
from kainhofer).
I'm just trying to do a binary s
On 2009-09-07, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 01:17:14PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> > P.S. Why doesn't this break `make doc' ?
>
> If it compiled under a previous git version, and you don't do a
> make doc-clean, then lilypond won't attempt to recompile the
> previously-com
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 01:17:14PM -0700, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> P.S. Why doesn't this break `make doc' ?
If it compiled under a previous git version, and you don't do a
make doc-clean, then lilypond won't attempt to recompile the
previously-compiled regtest.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
Hi,
I tried compiling the regression tests in a separate directory (just
using the lilypond binary), and the test
"spacing-loose-grace-linebreak.ly" fails to compile.
Attached is the tail end of `lilypond --verbose'.
Thanks,
Patrick
P.S. Why doesn't this break `make doc' ?
Interpreting music.
On 2009-09-06, Michael Käppler wrote:
> Hi Patrick,
> I recently noticed that /input/regression/bookparts.ly gives the
> warning "Missing stencil expression: utf-8-string" what I think is
> related to your patchset.
> Could you please have a look at this?
This should be fixed in git.
Thanks,
Patr
On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 10:00 AM, weblily wrote:
> Compiling LilyPond's scheme code might lead to a considerable speed up.
> Guile 1.9.2 comes with a scheme compiler. I 've tried now for some time to
> get the compiler running, but it will need some more work.
>
> * Is anyone doing the same and want
On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Valentin
Villenave wrote:
> If nobody objects, I'll open a page in the tracker to keep track of this idea.
Added as #835.
Regards,
Valentin
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/ma
Hi Karl,
or when there are lyrics to assign.
What do you mean here?
Do you mean lyrics to assign to the *second voice* (since the first
voice assignment would be automagic)?
Try:
\version "2.13.0"
\score {
\new Staff {
\time 4/4
\relative g' { g4 << g \\ d >> g2 }
}
\addlyrics
...
> > or when there are lyrics to assign.
> What do you mean here?
> Do you mean lyrics to assign to the *second voice* (since the first
> voice assignment would be automagic)?
Try:
\version "2.13.0"
\score {
\new Staff {
\time 4/4
\relative g' { g4 << g \\ d >> g2 }
}
\addlyri
Hi Trevor,
This change would help, but I don't think it
would solve the whole problem. You'd still have
an implied name for the second context, so it
doesn't work in more than one staff
Probably true... I'll have to examine the ramifications.
or when there are lyrics to assign.
What do yo
I like what you've done.
I've put a couple of comments in. They are not mandatory, but just for
your consideration.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/115065/diff/1001/1003
File scm/paper.scm (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/115065/diff/1001/1003#newcode220
Line 220: (scaleable-values
Hi all,
I rewrote the patchset to have less doubled scheme code and make it
extensible.
Any comments are very welcome.
Regards,
Michael
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Graham Percival wrote:
> In the case of Arabic music, I think part of the argument (in
> favor) was that the notation isn't standard, but the author(s) did
> the best they could, and people interested in seeing the
> inconsistencies can progress to X, Y, and Z. It's also only one
> page... I could
2009/9/7 Michael Käppler :
> Hi all,
> Hmm... was there any progress since July on this topic?
> I'd like to year if there's anything new... ;)
Not really, I'm afraid. The reason is that I've been abroad for a few
months and couldn't really work on this for the last couple of weeks.
I won't have a
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 08:07:33AM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> Graham Percival wrote Monday, September 07, 2009 12:53 AM
>
>> No; dump it in the Advanced git section. It's not something we
>> want to insist that first-time contributors do. Once they show
>> themselves to be regular, and get
Kieren MacMillan wrote Sunday, September 06, 2009 3:34 PM
\\ is quite more convenient than explicit voices and thus an
important
idiom that makes Lilypond friendlier to the user.
Yes, but as previously discussed, the confusion it (ultimately)
causes is a poor
trade-off. The whole problem w
Op maandag 24-08-2009 om 23:33 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Graham
Percival:
> I'm getting build errors in freetype.
Are you sure this is freetype and not cross/gcc? ;-)
> File "bin/../gub/specs/cross/gcc.py", line 105, in patch
> Gcc.patch (self)
> File "bin/../gub/specs/cross/gcc.py",
Joseph Wakeling wrote Monday, September 07, 2009 12:41 AM
Joseph Wakeling wrote:
the duplication of two @nodes called 'Further reading' may break
the doc
build -- just checking that now.
Duplicate node names in the same manual do break the build.
... which the attached patch should fix.
On Wed, 2009-09-02 at 09:34 +0200, Michael Käppler wrote:
> Hi Neil,
> > 1. Setting system-count = 1 causes a segfault (try running the file
> > Documentation/general/examples/granados.ly)
> >
> I've checked out a fresh master and it seems that it also crashes
> without my patches. Can you repr
Graham Percival wrote Monday, September 07, 2009 12:53 AM
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 11:22:42PM +0100, Trevor Daniels wrote:
Joseph Wakeling wrote Sunday, September 06, 2009 10:36 PM
This probably _is_ something which should be in the docs as it's
not
something you would imagine would be a s
29 matches
Mail list logo
