On 23.02.2010, at 02:18, Graham Percival wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 07:31:37PM +0100, James Bailey wrote:
As I understand it, the critical problems previously had with
lilypond on
10.5 (and now 10.6) have been resolved. And since the issue was just
raised on the -user list. Would it be u
On 23.02.2010, at 02:18, Graham Percival wrote:
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 07:31:37PM +0100, James Bailey wrote:
As I understand it, the critical problems previously had with
lilypond on
10.5 (and now 10.6) have been resolved. And since the issue was just
raised on the -user list. Would it be u
Am Dienstag, 23. Februar 2010 02:15:55 schrieb Graham Percival:
> Unless the government of Canada webservers are giving me a
> different HTML file than you, your "checking" is flawed.
[...]
> We are not doing research or private study. We are not doing
> criticism or review. We are not doing ne
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 07:31:37PM +0100, James Bailey wrote:
> As I understand it, the critical problems previously had with lilypond on
> 10.5 (and now 10.6) have been resolved. And since the issue was just
> raised on the -user list. Would it be useful now to simply have the
> PPC/Intel binar
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 03:59:04PM +0100, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2010, at 15:26, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>>> Read it yourself. Does the use affect the market of the original
>>> work?
>>> That would suffice, as copyright law is essentially a business law.
>>
>> No. Fair dealing under Can
On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 22:12 +, n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
> On 2010/02/22 21:10:25, joeneeman wrote:
>
> > For vertical positioning to work, it's important that
> after-line-breaking be
> > called before Page_layout_problem does its work. Can you check that
> this is
> > still the case?
>
> T
On 2/22/10 11:01 AM, "Neil Puttock" wrote:
> On 22 February 2010 17:31, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure exactly what the current proposed syntax is (we've had some
>> discussions off-list, but not for a while). I would have expected him to
>> add Markup 0-5, instead of SCM 0-4. But
On 2010/02/22 21:10:25, joeneeman wrote:
For vertical positioning to work, it's important that
after-line-breaking be
called before Page_layout_problem does its work. Can you check that
this is
still the case?
The regression tests check out (though that's hardly surprising,
considering all
http://codereview.appspot.com/203054/diff/1/2
File lily/system.cc (left):
http://codereview.appspot.com/203054/diff/1/2#oldcode193
lily/system.cc:193: }
For vertical positioning to work, it's important that
after-line-breaking be called before Page_layout_problem does its work.
Can you check tha
Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 19:09 uur [tijdzone +0200], schreef Dave
Plater:
Hi Dave,
> lilypond is no longer building for openSUSE Factory due to the switch to
> gcc45. I noticed from the git logs that you have worked on
> spacing-spanner.cc recently which is where gcc45 fails.
Yes, I noticed.
I
On 30 January 2010 19:44, Patrick McCarty wrote:
> I could reproduce this too, so I must have flubbed something in the
> process of running `make check'.
Minor update: I also flubbed something while checking the svg output,
since I ran the test file using ly:set-option; I hadn't noticed that
thi
As I understand it, the critical problems previously had with
lilypond on 10.5 (and now 10.6) have been resolved. And since the
issue was just raised on the -user list. Would it be useful now to
simply have the PPC/Intel binaries (labeled as such)?
_
On 22 February 2010 17:31, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I'm not sure exactly what the current proposed syntax is (we've had some
> discussions off-list, but not for a while). I would have expected him to
> add Markup 0-5, instead of SCM 0-4. But I haven't seen the specifics of his
> final proposal y
nicolas.sce...@gmail.com writes:
> Reviewers: ,
>
> Message:
> Hi,
>
> This is a proof-of-concept for instanciable scheme engravers, with
> private instance slots.
>
> There is at least one issue that I have to solve before this is
> commitable, as this shows the following warning:
>
> Warning : A
On 2/22/10 10:12 AM, "Neil Puttock" wrote:
> On 22 February 2010 16:39, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> Any concerns about me pushing this patch?
>
> What's the proposed markup command which needs this?
Thomas is trying to clean up the ChordName markup definition with a standard
format that should
Reviewers: Patrick McCarty,
Message:
On 2010/02/21 21:09:54, Patrick McCarty wrote:
Is the 'after-line-breaking callback for BarNumber necessary?
I'm not quite sure; though it's unlikely anbody's going to change the
BarNumber stencil to a tall column (which would need the callback to
prevent
On 22 February 2010 16:39, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> Any concerns about me pushing this patch?
What's the proposed markup command which needs this?
LGTM, but will need documenting in Extending 2.2.3.
Cheers,
Neil
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypon
Any concerns about me pushing this patch?
Carl
On 2/22/10 8:55 AM, "Thomas Morgan" wrote:
> Handle in `lily/lexer.ll' and `lily/parser.yy'.
> ---
> lily/lexer.ll |2 ++
> lily/parser.yy |4
> 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lily/lexer.ll b/lil
Handle in `lily/lexer.ll' and `lily/parser.yy'.
---
lily/lexer.ll |2 ++
lily/parser.yy |4
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lily/lexer.ll b/lily/lexer.ll
index ccc8dee..c4bc7b9 100644
--- a/lily/lexer.ll
+++ b/lily/lexer.ll
@@ -555,6 +555,8 @@ BOM_UTF8
On 02/22/2010 01:39 PM, Dave Plater wrote:
> On 02/22/2010 09:02 AM, Dave Plater wrote:
>
>> Hi, I maintain lilypond for openSUSE and factory builds have switched to
>> gcc45 and I'm now getting build failures. The build fails at :-
>> |rm -f ./out/spacing-spanner.dep;
>> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT=".
On 22 Feb 2010, at 15:26, Graham Percival wrote:
"The fair dealing clauses[1] of the Canadian Copyright Act allow
users
to engage in certain activities relating to research, private study,
criticism, review, or news reporting."
Read it yourself. Does the use affect the market of the original
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 01:49:24PM +0100, Bertalan Fodor (LilyPondTool) wrote:
> Why not ask for rights from Stockhausen's copyright owner?
If you want to ask them to place it under the GNU FDL or creative
commons -- both of which imply **unlimited and unhindered**
distribution -- go ahead. I can
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 12:55:01PM +0100, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2010, at 11:50, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>> "The fair dealing clauses[1] of the Canadian Copyright Act allow users
>> to engage in certain activities relating to research, private study,
>> criticism, review, or news reporting.
Why not ask for rights from Stockhausen's copyright owner?
I would try:
m...@stockhausen.org
Anyway, the fact that the example is an SVG is not too good: it has
problems displaying the tuplet numbers, and a pp.
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
On 22 Feb 2010, at 13:32, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
I repeat: there is no way that our use of Stockhausen would
qualify as
"fair dealing" under Canadian copyright law. I cannot speak to
copyright law in Germany, Sweden, or other jurisdictions.
So what makes you so sure. Is that what a copy
Hi,
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Hans Aberg wrote:
> On 22 Feb 2010, at 11:50, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> >I repeat: there is no way that our use of Stockhausen would qualify as
> >"fair dealing" under Canadian copyright law. I cannot speak to
> >copyright law in Germany, Sweden, or other jurisdictio
On 22 Feb 2010, at 11:50, Graham Percival wrote:
That said, I can't see how using that exerpt could possibly
qualify under Canada's "fair dealing" provisions in the copyright
act. Distributing that de.wikipedia.org page in Canada would thus
constitute an infringement of copyright.
Since it is
On 02/22/2010 09:02 AM, Dave Plater wrote:
> Hi, I maintain lilypond for openSUSE and factory builds have switched to
> gcc45 and I'm now getting build failures. The build fails at :-
> |rm -f ./out/spacing-spanner.dep;
> DEPENDENCIES_OUTPUT="./out/spacing-spanner.dep ./out/spacing-spanner.o" g++
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:56 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 10:36 uur [tijdzone +], schreef Graham
> Percival:
>
>> Maybe I'm missing something, but I see nothing in that Stockhausen
>> example that isn't covered by Trevor Baca's example:
>> http://lilypond.org/~graha
Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 10:36 uur [tijdzone +], schreef Graham
Percival:
> Maybe I'm missing something, but I see nothing in that Stockhausen
> example that isn't covered by Trevor Baca's example:
> http://lilypond.org/~graham/website/examples.html
The colours!
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 10:01 AM, Hans Aberg wrote:
>
> On 22 Feb 2010, at 04:26, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>> That said, I can't see how using that exerpt could possibly
>> qualify under Canada's "fair dealing" provisions in the copyright
>> act. Distributing that de.wikipedia.org page in Canada
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:23 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
> Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 07:58 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Werner
> LEMBERG:
>> > In answer to any question about using such examples in the LilyPond
>> > documentation: The official LilyPond documentation should not
>> > include any ma
On 22 Feb 2010, at 04:26, Graham Percival wrote:
see the german wikipedia
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/LilyPond
too bad it's under dispute.
Is it? I don't see such a remark. It is only stated that the
picture
shows copyrighted material which can only be cited legally as a very
smal
On Mon, 22 Feb 2010 10:23:37 +0100, Jan Nieuwenhuizen
wrote:
Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 07:58 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Werner
LEMBERG:
> In answer to any question about using such examples in the LilyPond
> documentation: The official LilyPond documentation should not
> include any material
Op maandag 22-02-2010 om 07:58 uur [tijdzone +0100], schreef Werner
LEMBERG:
> > In answer to any question about using such examples in the LilyPond
> > documentation: The official LilyPond documentation should not
> > include any material which infringes on copyright in any country.
>
> I fully s
> I didnt have time to write the songs in the notation. However, I have
> another sample, the easier one. This time, the song is "Amazing Grace" --
> translated to Bahasa Indonesia. (yes, it's in Indonesia).
> Can you take a look and see if it make sense? The notes are simple enough.
> The score is
36 matches
Mail list logo
