I haven't worked with MusicXML, but I notice that this test apparently contains
a whole-measure rest, yet the ly generated in
input/regression/musicxml/out-test/41g-PartNoId.ly by "make check" does not.
It seems to have been this way as far back as 2.12[1], but I question whether
it is correct
On Oct 5, 2020, at 18:58, Dan Eble wrote:
>
> After some investigation, I'd like to ask the other contributors some
> questions because I don't see very strong reasons to go one way or the other.
>
> A. Should context-specific music with no music inside it create the context
> or not? Right n
On Oct 5, 2020, at 12:02, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Jonas Hahnfeld writes:
>
>> Am Montag, den 05.10.2020, 10:55 -0400 schrieb Dan Eble:
> Absolutely no idea which is correct. Sorry. :/
Dan? I think this issue started occuring after a change of yours,
so do you have an idea a
Le 06/10/2020 à 00:40, Jean Abou Samra a écrit :
Le 05/10/2020 à 10:08, Jonas Hahnfeld a écrit :
Am Montag, den 05.10.2020, 00:24 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
Hi,
I'm tracking down a failure of make test
(https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/jobs/771327851).
[...]
From this, is there
Le 05/10/2020 à 10:08, Jonas Hahnfeld a écrit :
Am Montag, den 05.10.2020, 00:24 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
Hi,
I'm tracking down a failure of make test
(https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/jobs/771327851).
[...]
From this, is there a way I can view which file failed?
The build sys
On Oct 5, 2020, at 07:49, Jonas Hahnfeld wrote:
>
> That said, I believe it would be reasonable to create a stable branch
> and start picking fixes into that as needed. Before diving into the
> details, I'd first like to know if there's still disagreement on this
> starting point? If so, I'd love
Am 05.10.2020 um 15:17 schrieb Karlin High:
On 10/5/2020 7:33 AM, Michael Käppler wrote:
Sure, it may be that there are
still lots of problems there, waiting to be uncovered. But debating
whether
we need more testing at first does not help, when we do not have
enough people to do it.
What woul
>> [...], I believe it would be reasonable to create a stable branch
>> and start picking fixes into that as needed. Before diving into the
>> details, I'd first like to know if there's still disagreement on
>> this starting point? If so, I'd love to hear how to move forward
>
> I'm fine with creat
On 10/5/2020 7:33 AM, Michael Käppler wrote:
Sure, it may be that there are
still lots of problems there, waiting to be uncovered. But debating whether
we need more testing at first does not help, when we do not have
enough people to do it.
What would a reasonably-adequate testing effort look l
Am 05.10.2020 um 13:49 schrieb Jonas Hahnfeld:
Hi all,
Hi Jonas,
tomorrow marks exactly one month since Han-Wen's proposal to have a
freeze of 3 or 4 weeks for stabilizing [1]. While not everybody agreed
with that plan, I think it has worked pretty well in practice and there
has been no big dis
Hi all,
tomorrow marks exactly one month since Han-Wen's proposal to have a
freeze of 3 or 4 weeks for stabilizing [1]. While not everybody agreed
with that plan, I think it has worked pretty well in practice and there
has been no big disturbance AFAICT. Instead many fixes landed, but in
my opinio
Hello,
Here is the current patch countdown list. The next countdown will be on
October 7th.
A list of all merge requests can be found here:
https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/merge_requests?sort=label_priority
Push:
!431 Reset text-font-defaults per session - Jonas Hahnfeld
https:/
Am Montag, den 05.10.2020, 00:24 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> Hi,
>
> I'm tracking down a failure of make test
> (https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/jobs/771327851).
>
> [...]
>
> From this, is there a way I can view which file failed?
The build system tells you:
> To begin investigat
13 matches
Mail list logo
