Graham Percival writes:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 01:06:15AM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
>> Le jeudi 26 novembre 2009 à 23:40 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> > Dunno. Believe me, I never put anything in the translations.
>>
>> According to git history, you did :-)
>
> I modified files to
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 01:06:15AM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> Le jeudi 26 novembre 2009 à 23:40 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> > Make sure that the texi2html is being called with the right
> > arguments. I think the relevant command is in make/doc-i8n-*.
>
> Sure, but after my hacking tex
Le jeudi 26 novembre 2009 à 23:40 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> Make sure that the texi2html is being called with the right
> arguments. I think the relevant command is in make/doc-i8n-*.
Sure, but after my hacking texi2html currently dies at manuals in
English. I'm about to remove the code
Graham Percival writes:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
>> in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
>> developer list. Those can be skimmed off into documentation, wi
On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 12:21:35AM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> Ooops, no, I still get index_xx.html filenames for splitted translated
> manuals. In the process on solving this, I'm currently trying to make
> extract_texi_filenames work (making systematic trailing spaces removal),
Make sure tha
Le mercredi 25 novembre 2009 à 22:07 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 09:33:50PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> > Jan already translate a few sentences in several nodes in French and
> > Dutch, and while splitted HTML translated docs used to be written as
> > index_xx.html
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 11:12:26PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> We are not talking about explaining concepts to potential contributors
> in private. We are talking about explanations happening on the
> developer list. Those can be skimmed off into documentation, without
> requiring all too much
Valentin Villenave writes:
> On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
>> Well then, I think we should open a new issue. :-)
>
> There you go : code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=908
>
> (http:// is so passé...)
On the other hand, the http:// is what allows my mail reade
Graham Percival writes:
> And I would ask new contributors to see the whole story from the
> point of view of somebody who spent years and year programming
> lilypond, explaining concepts to potential contributors only to
> have them disappear without writing any code or doc patches, and
> who ha
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 2:31 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> Then, I miss some general information of the future goals. Ok, the bugs
>> should be
>> eliminated, but rumor says that there are efforts to move functionality
>> from c++ to scheme.
>> Is this true?
>
> As far as I know, the goal to move fu
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 10:56:05AM +0100, Marc Hohl wrote:
> Well documented code is crucial in such a project for other
> developers to jump on the train, so learning by RTF code isn't
> fun (as mentioned elsewhere) - for me, it's annoying, it's
> frustrating, and it keeps me persistently feeling
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> John,
>
> It's been brought to my attention that we are using an incorrect spelling
> for "ukulele". We've been using (at least in part of our documentation)
> "ukelele".
>
> I've done a git grep for ukelele, and found the misspelling existi
"Trevor Daniels" writes:
> More comments would be an improvement, but I think too
> many will destroy the flow of the code when it is being
> read by more experienced developers. I would recommend
> a brief overview at the top which sets out the purpose,
> structure and method of the code. Comm
Continuing the thread from June
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-06/msg00167.html :
The reason why my code behaved badly is that
the comment in the TeX
"% so -E'd eps is at least that high"
has a space before the % sign. That space causes
extra space to be put into the jianpu
Carl Sorensen wrote Thursday, November 26, 2009 4:31 PM
On 11/26/09 2:56 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
Well documented code is crucial in such a project for other
developers
to jump
on the train, so learning by RTF code isn't fun (as mentioned
elsewhere) -
for me, it's annoying, it's frustrating
Carl Sorensen writes:
> 2) I think that it always takes developers less time to answer
> questions than to write the patch that you will produce.
I definitely disagree with "always". I am an old-school Unix wizard
myself, and there are situations when I am administering, say, an Ubuntu
system,
On 2009/11/26 09:13:58, nicolas.sceaux wrote:
Hi,
Maybe this patch, as a first step, should focus on the unification of
the syntax
of the two macros?
Hi Nicolas,
patch set 3 already makes make-builtin-markup-command upwards-compatible
with make-markup-command in its current form. I have
On 11/26/09 2:56 AM, "Marc Hohl" wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
> (un)documentated code
> with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
> technical
> arguments nor the knowledge, I mostly agree with David Kastrup.
>
> A
David Kastrup writes:
> Neil Puttock writes:
>
>> 2009/11/24 David Kastrup :
>>
>>> After applying http://codereview.appspot.com/160048> first,
>>> indeed the following diff that throws out all the toplevel scoping
>>> constructs and separate definitions of define-markup-command and
>>> define-m
I am considering trying to implement a first attempt
at providing a Baroque lute tab facility. This may
turn out to be a bite too large for me, but hey, that's
the way to learn. The first phase would be to implement
a minimal set of facilities which would output something
like Baroque tab in the
Sorry, some Germanism found its way into the mail,
sed "s/documentated/documented/g"
;-)
Marc
Marc Hohl schrieb:
Hello all,
I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
(un)documentated code
with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
technical
argumen
Hello all,
I followed the (partly very emotional) discussions about
(un)documentated code
with great interest, and aside from the fact that I neither have the
technical
arguments nor the knowledge, I mostly agree with David Kastrup.
As a frog, I feel supported very well from Carl et al., but
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 3:21 AM, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> Well then, I think we should open a new issue. :-)
There you go : code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=908
(http:// is so passé...)
Cheers,
Valentin
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
li
Neil Puttock writes:
> 2009/11/24 David Kastrup :
>
>> After applying http://codereview.appspot.com/160048> first,
>> indeed the following diff that throws out all the toplevel scoping
>> constructs and separate definitions of define-markup-command and
>> define-markup-list-command passes the reg
Hi,
Maybe this patch, as a first step, should focus on the unification of
the syntax of the two macros?
(define-markup-command (command-name layout props . arguments)
arguments-signature
#:properties property-bindings
#:allow-other-keys
#:rest body)
on the user side and:
(define-builti
25 matches
Mail list logo
