Re: Issue 5187 Add command for Thin Aiken noteheads (issue 326510043 by karlinh...@gmail.com)

Hi Karlin, On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Karlin High wrote: > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Karlin High wrote: >> All right, I'm giving up and asking for help. > > I got good help from Carl Sorenson; thanks! Changed patch for review, > now contains both code and documentation. > -- Glad y

Re: Issue 5187 Add command for Thin Aiken noteheads (issue 326510043 by karlinh...@gmail.com)

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Thomas Morley wrote: > Hi Karlin, > > at the time I started using git I was pointed to > https://git-scm.com/book/en/v2 > > Served me well (and still does) > > Cheers, > Harm Thanks for the reference! I started reading that (or a prior version) a year or three a

Re: Issue 5187 Add command for Thin Aiken noteheads (issue 326510043 by karlinh...@gmail.com)

2017-09-23 0:29 GMT+02:00 Karlin High : > On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Karlin High wrote: >> All right, I'm giving up and asking for help. > > I got good help from Carl Sorenson; thanks! Changed patch for review, > now contains both code and documentation. > -- > Karlin High > Missouri, USA

Re: Issue 5187 Add command for Thin Aiken noteheads (issue 326510043 by karlinh...@gmail.com)

On Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 2:37 PM, Karlin High wrote: > All right, I'm giving up and asking for help. I got good help from Carl Sorenson; thanks! Changed patch for review, now contains both code and documentation. -- Karlin High Missouri, USA ___ lilypon

Re: Issue 5187 Add command for Thin Aiken noteheads (issue 326510043 by karlinh...@gmail.com)

On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:28 AM, wrote: > Literally, just add one line of code to the example in Shape Note Heads, > in NR 1.1.4., that uses > either \aikenThinHeads or \aikenThinHeadsMinor (no need to include > both). No change in the text > is necessary. > > All we want is a single demonstrati

Re: [gs-devel] Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

This discussion concerns two mailing lists, some mails exist in both archives, but other mail seems to exist only in one archive. For convenience of people subscribing to only one mailing list, both mailing list archive URLs are as follows. http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2017-09/

Re: [gs-devel] Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

> In my impression, if > > $ gs -dSAFER -dEPSCrop -dCompatibilityLevel=1.4 -dNOPAUSE -dBATCH > -r1200 > -dSubsetFonts=false -sDEVICE=pdfwrite -dAutoRotatePages=/None > -sOutputFile=filename.pdf -c.setpdfwrite -ffilename.eps > > does not embed the completed font into PDF, Ghostscript developers >

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

>>If there is a full font embedded (non-subset) PDF, >>does the bigpdfs trick work effectively? > > Its still, in my opinion, a risky thing to do. However, if the font > were fully embedded, you wouldn't need to use Ghostscript and the > PDFDontUseFontObjectNum bug approach (which is the risky par

Re: Fwd: You Made Our List: The 50 Best Music Tools Online

Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Jason OConnor > Date: Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:47 PM > Subject: You Made Our List: The 50 Best Music Tools Online > To: "han...@xs4all.nl" > > > > > Hi Han-Wen Nienhu

Fwd: You Made Our List: The 50 Best Music Tools Online

-- Forwarded message -- From: Jason OConnor Date: Fri, Sep 22, 2017 at 3:47 PM Subject: You Made Our List: The 50 Best Music Tools Online To: "han...@xs4all.nl" Hi Han-Wen Nienhuys, I wanted to let you know that LilyPond

Re: Add alpha transparency to SVG backend (issue 330300043 by beauleetien...@gmail.com)

On 2017/09/22 11:34:30, dak wrote: On 2017/09/22 11:19:08, Ebe123 wrote: > Add to regression tests I think it is a bad idea to change rgb-color here: this is a recipe for wide-reaching incompatibilities for the sake of limited applications. It would make more sense to meddle with the type

Re: Add alpha transparency to SVG backend (issue 330300043 by beauleetien...@gmail.com)

On 2017/09/22 11:19:08, Ebe123 wrote: Add to regression tests I think it is a bad idea to change rgb-color here: this is a recipe for wide-reaching incompatibilities for the sake of limited applications. It would make more sense to meddle with the type of the "transparent" property, making it a

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

At 10:12 22/09/2017 +0200, David Kastrup wrote: Well, if we could delay the embedding, I'd not be particularly sad: "make doc" currently(?) eats up more than 3Gb which is sort of ridiculous. The intermediate PDFs for lilypond-book are arranged in some "database" and not really externalized, so

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

At 10:23 22/09/2017 +0200, David Kastrup wrote: If it's a conceivable part of a good longterm strategy: I think our fonts are generated via Fontforge starting with a METAFONT (or METAPOST?) font description, so it's conceivable that if other font formats would generally be better supported by to

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

Ken Sharp writes: > At 00:41 22/09/2017 +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > > >> > Or, even so, should we take other methods (e.g. using non-embedded PDFs)? >> >>If we figure out a working alternative, we should take it. The current >>set of Ghostscript bugs in 9.22 is still a bit in flux, so it's not

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

Ken Sharp writes: > At 07:01 22/09/2017 +0900, Masamichi Hosoda wrote: > >>If there is a full font embedded (non-subset) PDF, >>does the bigpdfs trick work effectively? > > Its still, in my opinion, a risky thing to do. However, if the font > were fully embedded, you wouldn't need to use Ghostscr

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

At 00:41 22/09/2017 +0200, David Kastrup wrote: > Or, even so, should we take other methods (e.g. using non-embedded PDFs)? If we figure out a working alternative, we should take it. The current set of Ghostscript bugs in 9.22 is still a bit in flux, so it's not clear yet which alternative ac

Re: Ghostscript/GhostPDL 9.22 Release Candidate 1

At 07:01 22/09/2017 +0900, Masamichi Hosoda wrote: If there is a full font embedded (non-subset) PDF, does the bigpdfs trick work effectively? Its still, in my opinion, a risky thing to do. However, if the font were fully embedded, you wouldn't need to use Ghostscript and the PDFDontUseFontO