On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 04:45:17AM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 10/29/11 9:23 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
> >I really think this can be fixed by explicitly including a header
> >and/or linking to a library.
>
> No, I'm on Leopard.
>
> In flower/include/std-vector.hh we see:
>
> 70 #i
On 10/29/11 9:23 PM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:34:35PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> I think I figured it out. The OSX compiler doesn't have a built in
>> std::vector namespace, so we use the vector class in flower/.
>
>That sounds weird. Are you on lion, and does
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 09:03:28PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> File "/Users/Carl/git-cl/projecthosting_upload.py", line 94
> except gdata.client.RequestError as err:
> ^
> SyntaxError: invalid syntax
huh, that's supposed to be valid. I'm on python 2.6.
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 11:34:35PM +, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> I think I figured it out. The OSX compiler doesn't have a built in
> std::vector namespace, so we use the vector class in flower/.
That sounds weird. Are you on lion, and does that default to llvm
instead of gcc ? If so, you might
On 25 October 2011 02:00, Keith OHara wrote:
> Possibly I did this. Sometime in 2007, the space after a key-signature
> or time-signature or clef became very compressible, because some spacing
> parameters were no longer respected (issue 1785).
Xavier a écrit
> I think you find the good spot.
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:30:07PM +0200, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> On Oct 29, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> > 2) I don't have a fast enough computer to want to sit through a
> > doc rebuild for every patch
>
> I may be able to get a dedicated server for Patchy in the next yea
On 10/29/11 4:27 PM, "Carl Sorensen" wrote:
>Having some time to do some work on LilyPond, I grabbed a fresh master.
>
>It no longer builds on OSX.
>
>The compile fails in lily/staff-symbol.cc, with the following:
>
>
>
>The code was introduced in d10ec4f5a95d5b205da1bd73102697f8cc03b5b6
>
>Can a
On 24 October 2011 22:13, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
>
> Hey Xavier,
>
> If you use git bisect, you can track it down to an individual commit.
> This'll help us figure out how to fix the problem.
Hey,
Sorry for late follow-up.
I used git bisect between 2.15.9 and 2.15.10 (following instructio
Having some time to do some work on LilyPond, I grabbed a fresh master.
It no longer builds on OSX.
The compile fails in lily/staff-symbol.cc, with the following:
staff-symbol.cc: In static member function 'static std::vector > Staff_symbol::line_positions(Grob*)':
staff-symbol.cc:107: error: no
I've moved to the new git-cl as requested. I tried to upload a fix for
Issue 11 for review (yes, I think I finally have the beamlet problem
fixed).
But when I tried to upload it, I had an error with git-cl:
sorensen2:lilypond Carl$ git-cl upload master
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "
On Oct 29, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
> 2) I don't have a fast enough computer to want to sit through a
> doc rebuild for every patch
>
I may be able to get a dedicated server for Patchy in the next year or so -
I'll keep you posted.
Cheers,
MS
__
Third Draft. Thanks so far. James
http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5315053/diff/5001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode1020
Documentation/notation/input.itely
Some Doc policy nit-picks
http://codereview.appspot.com/5306076/diff/1/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely
File Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5306076/diff/1/Documentation/notation/changing-defaults.itely#newcode727
Documentation
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 03:38:27PM +0200, m...@apollinemike.com wrote:
> I'll have time in early 2012 to work on Patchy in more detail,
> but there is one contribution that I can make right away. I
> thought that patchy did a full doc build (BUILD_ALL_DOCS =
> True), but the most recent problem wi
"m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
> On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>> Again, it would be great if somebody with more patience and/or
>> pride in their work could take over Patchy. As an incentive, you
>> don't need to deal with our review process. I'll hand git push
>> abi
Hi David,
On 29/10/11 13:22, David Kastrup wrote:
> Ian Hulin writes:
>
>> Hi David, I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think
>> you're trying to amend a section of manual here that needs a
>> re-think/re-write.
>
> No flame war intended. As I said: I can't expend the effort to do
On Oct 27, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
> Again, it would be great if somebody with more patience and/or
> pride in their work could take over Patchy. As an incentive, you
> don't need to deal with our review process. I'll hand git push
> ability for that repo out to anybody; just h
On Oct 29, 2011, at 9:00 AM, d...@gnu.org wrote:
>>
>
> Patch has been backed out. It broke the documentation build this
> morning. And it broke the documentation build with a line that Neil has
> already pointed out yesterday at noon. It is not that this particular
> mistake was unheard of.
On Oct 29, 2011, at 9:51 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> sorry about losing track of this.
>
> No need to apologize: _my_ computer is far too slow to be useful for
> bisection, anyway. It looks like we will have a bit of bijection
> flakiness for a while until we get th
Ian Hulin writes:
> Hi David,
> I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think you're trying to
> amend a section of manual here that needs a re-think/re-write.
No flame war intended. As I said: I can't expend the effort to do this
well. I got annoyed by wrong information and corrected
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:09:03PM +0100, Ian Hulin wrote:
> I can have a look at this section and think about a redraft. Carl, do
> you have enough time to review a draft for Scheme-fu if I write the
> first draft in OpenOffice Write?
A rewrite sounds good, but I heavily discourage openoffice. J
Hi David,
I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think you're trying to
amend a section of manual here that needs a re-think/re-write.
I came to this conclusion when I noticed one place where it looked
like you were thinking in German, and made a common mistake in the
English version thro
Han-Wen Nienhuys writes:
> On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 1:13 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Well, I am currently in the process of running make info (similar to
>> make doc), and this is totally silly.
>>
>> In my opinion, the whole lybook-db stuff needs to go. Instead, Lilypond
>> is run _once_ for al
David Kastrup writes:
> Valentin Villenave writes:
>
>> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 5:29 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>> Perhaps I have not put myself forward reasonably clearly: the idea was
>>> not just to use a predicate in the function signature, but to let that
>>> predicate be special-cased in t
Reinhold Kainhofer writes:
> Am Mittwoch, 26. Januar 2011, um 20:00:31 schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Reinhold Kainhofer writes:
>> > I'm defining my own predicate symbol-or-markup? for the argument of a
>> > markup function.
> [...]
>> > but, as soon as I try to pass a markup, the parser complains t
Graham Percival writes:
> sorry about losing track of this.
No need to apologize: _my_ computer is far too slow to be useful for
bisection, anyway. It looks like we will have a bit of bijection
flakiness for a while until we get the staging business sorted out.
--
David Kastrup
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 09:31:16AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Sigh. Again it has not been fast-forwarded, but the history has been
> straightened out, dissolving my merge commit.
oops, I think this is my fault. I haven't read your last 20 or so
emails about git; I was too fixated on working o
David Kastrup writes:
> David Kastrup writes:
>
>> Graham Percival writes:
>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:43:20AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
After having my local staging up-to-date,
I just pushed staging~1 to origin/dev/staging.
>>>
>>> thanks, checked and pushed to master.
David Kastrup writes:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
>> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:43:20AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>
>>> After having my local staging up-to-date,
>>> I just pushed staging~1 to origin/dev/staging.
>>
>> thanks, checked and pushed to master.
>
> Sigh. Again it has not been f
Graham Percival writes:
> On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:43:20AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> After having my local staging up-to-date,
>> I just pushed staging~1 to origin/dev/staging.
>
> thanks, checked and pushed to master.
Sigh. Again it has not been fast-forwarded, but the history has b
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 08:43:20AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> After having my local staging up-to-date,
> I just pushed staging~1 to origin/dev/staging.
thanks, checked and pushed to master.
since the whole point of dev/staging is that it gets automatically
checked and pushed, there's no wa
On 2011/10/28 13:26:22, mike_apollinemike.com wrote:
On Oct 28, 2011, at 3:24 PM, mailto:n.putt...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5293053/diff/11005/input/regression/footnote-break-visibility.ly
> File input/regression/footnote-break-visibility.ly (left):
>
>
http://co
32 matches
Mail list logo
