On Wed, 31 Aug 2011 00:56:53 -0700, Trevor Daniels
wrote:
The horizontal spacing of fret diagrams is much tighter in 2.15.9;
too tight I would say. Is this an expected change?
From the patch for issue 1779.
Fret boards were, sometimes, getting the spacing intended for the first note
afte
- Original Message -
From: "Phil Holmes"
To: ; "Keith OHara"
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: 2.15.9 regtests
- Original Message -
From: "Keith OHara"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: 2.15.9 re
- Original Message -
From: "Keith OHara"
To:
Sent: Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:31 AM
Subject: Re: 2.15.9 regtests
Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
Two unexpected spacing changes that I will investigate:
beam-extreme.ly spacing-correction-accidentals.ly
The /new
A couple more observations:
The horizontal spacing of fret diagrams is much tighter in 2.15.9;
too tight I would say. Is this an expected change? See
fret-diagrams-fret-label.ly
fret-diagrams-landscape.ly
fret-diagrams-opposing-landscape.ly
fret-diagrams-dots.ly
fret-diagrams-xo-label.ly
etc
Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
> > beam-feather-breaking.ly : lots of changes system spacing.
Oops. Instead of the above, I meant to reference
> dynamics-alignment-breaker-linebreak.ly : lots of extra space at
> the beginning of the first bar.
when I said
> My fix to issue 1785 changed the sp
On Aug 31, 2011, at 5:08 AM, Keith OHara wrote:
> Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes:
>
>> Or we could take shifts in checking images.
>
> I've looked closely at the changes with distance 5.0 or above, and
> looked quickly at the others. If one more person takes a shift
> starting at the sma
On Aug 31, 2011, at 7:52 AM, Graham Percival wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:08:04AM +, Keith OHara wrote:
>> I've looked closely at the changes with distance 5.0 or above, and
>> looked quickly at the others. If one more person takes a shift
>> starting at the small 'distances' that wou
Graham Percival percival-music.ca> writes:
> please add a new Critical issue for [profiles]. We can always mark it
> invalid later.
now issue 1858
> song-melisma.ly
The former extra space was issue 1779
> beam-feather-breaking.ly : lots of changes system spacing. Mike,
> IIRC feathered bea
On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:08:04AM +, Keith OHara wrote:
> I've looked closely at the changes with distance 5.0 or above, and
> looked quickly at the others. If one more person takes a shift
> starting at the small 'distances' that would be great.
5.0 and above? ok, I'll do the rest.
> One
Keith OHara oco.net> writes:
> Two unexpected spacing changes that I will investigate:
> beam-extreme.ly spacing-correction-accidentals.ly
The /new/ behavior is correct in these two tests.
(That is, the output matches the intent of the code)
I forgot to mention, tuplet brackets now span thei
Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes:
> Or we could take shifts in checking images.
I've looked closely at the changes with distance 5.0 or above, and
looked quickly at the others. If one more person takes a shift
starting at the small 'distances' that would be great.
One concern: Cell counts
On Aug 30, 2011, at 3:46 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
> Well - there are too many differences on the official page for me to count.
> It was clearly going to be iffy when I looked at the "items still to load" in
> the browser and it was over 1100. In my pixel comparator, I've got 1,031
> difference
Phil Holmes philholmes.net> writes:
> the other
> is a slight spacing change - it looks like, as a general rule, 2.15.9 is
> slightly more compact on ragged-right versus 2.15.7 (which is my local
> baseline).
Due to the fix for issue 1779.
> I'll attach one difference file which I don't und
Well - there are too many differences on the official page for me to count.
It was clearly going to be iffy when I looked at the "items still to load"
in the browser and it was over 1100. In my pixel comparator, I've got 1,031
difference files to check.
There are 2 obvious causes of this: one
14 matches
Mail list logo
