On 2011/05/04 17:08:39, Carl wrote:
Looks mostly good to me.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newc
Pushed as
9bc65fa2efa4711ce96c648db6d703ae190f944c
Graham, if you want to add your 'new' comments now here, I can pick
these up and run with a new issue number for these changes.
I still need to look at the 'second half' as you mentioned that in a
comment in one of the earlier drafts, that 'for
LGTM
2011/5/19
> On 2011/05/05 23:06:25, Graham Percival wrote:
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
>
>> File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
>>
>
>
>
> http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input
On 2011/05/05 23:06:25, Graham Percival wrote:
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode674
Documentation/not
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode674
Documentation/notation/input.itely:674: @example
On 2011/05/05 11:
Looks mostly good to me.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode667
Documentation/notation/input.itely:
comments about the first section.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode674
Documentation/notation/input.itel
Draft 8
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/32001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode667
Documentation/notation/input.itely:667: Text fields left un
7th Draft up for review.
Drafts 5 and 6 are not valid (one was just to keep the patch alive with
lots of other recent changes and 6 was a mistake by me).
Draft 4 was the last draft to have comments on so compare with 7 please.
You can also see drafts 4 vs 3 to see what still has to be done - as
Just an updated.
New Patch for @lilypond policy here
http://codereview.appspot.com/4445070/
Once we have ratified this we can apply it to this one.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https:/
5th Draft, nothing to really check (apart from Marks 3 spacing edits)
but have removed the ly file now pushed in commit
524f726a5de0033e68525c65e58430de9b60b7ca
So this is just some admin work so I know that the latest iteration of
the patch is here.
http://codereview.appspot.com/412405
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/18001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/18001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode548
Documentation/notation/input.itely:548:
@lilypond[quote,verbatim,nor
Thanks again to everyone here for helping to finish what I
started. I'll leave the style/content issues to the rest of
you; the comments below are just nitpicks.
- Mark
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/18001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (
4th Draft posted.
Still to do:
Showing how 'breakbefore' works, as it was evident from recent mails
that I need to go back and read the LM to see how to show this in an
@lilypond.
Also the last third of this patch still needs to be 'done' - we've left
this until we get the first parts sorted. J
Third draft done - sorry it took so long.
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/9001/Documentation/notation/input.itely
File Documentation/notation/input.itely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/4124056/diff/9001/Documentation/notation/input.itely#newcode541
Documentation/notation/inpu
Read Usage and play with lilypond-book a bit on your own.
1. I want you to create a Tiny .tely file and compile it to a pdf.
2. play with a few [options] to the @lilypond[]s in your Tiny file.
3. in particular, play with linewidth and textheight or pageheight or
page sizes or \paper { height = 5\m
Reviewers: Graham Percival, lilyfan_orange.fr, Trevor Daniels,
t.daniels_treda.co.uk, james.lowe_datacore.com, graham_percival-music.ca,
Message:
Second draft been posted. I couldn't work out how to do one request so
this has not been changed.
Putting the tagline in an @lilypond without having
On 2011/02/06 17:48:56, Trevor Daniels wrote:
This comment of mine from Mark's patch still applies, even after these
changes:
> I've looked at the compiled version now. It's nicely
> written, but my concern is that this is no longer written
> in 'reference' style. To me, parts of it seem mor
wrote Sunday, February 06, 2011 8:41
PM
On 2011/02/06 17:48:56, Trevor Daniels wrote:
This comment of mine from Mark's patch still applies, even after
these
changes:
> I've looked at the compiled version now. It's nicely
> written, but my concern is that this is no longer written
> in
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 01:41:45PM +, James Lowe wrote:
> Where my skill falls down is if the new section names cannot be
> moved lock stock and barrel over to the LM and I have to end up
> making new nodes. Otherwise I can easily just cut/paste edited
> chunks into the existing LM texi/tely fi
...@gmail.com
Cc: re...@codereview.appspotmail.com; lilypond-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: Doc: NR rewrite of 3.2 Titles and Headers (issue4124056)
wrote Sunday, February 06, 2011 8:41
PM
> > On 2011/02/06 17:48:56, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>> > This comment of mine from Mark's patch still
This comment of mine from Mark's patch still applies, even after these
changes:
I've looked at the compiled version now. It's nicely
written, but my concern is that this is no longer written
in 'reference' style. To me, parts of it seem more
suited to the LM. The idea of the NR is that people
On Mon, Feb 07, 2011 at 11:02:16AM -, Trevor Daniels wrote:
>
> I think the spacing controls are now so complex that
> they really do need a 'learning' approach to help
> users understand how to approach page layout.
I'm probably missing something because I don't know what the new
spacing con
Le 06/02/2011 04:21, percival.music...@gmail.com disait :
[...]
Documentation/notation/input.itely:526: @subsection Creating titles,
headers, and footers
I get nervous when the @subsection doesn't match the @node, but I can't
think of a definitely alternative after a few seconds. The only serious
I've done a first pass at this. General comment: there's more "talking
through the code" than I'd like. I'm willing to relax this a bit for
Notation 3 instead of Notation 1+2, but I think it can be tightened up a
bit with some work.
Other than that, not bad at all! I think we're looking at 4-5
25 matches
Mail list logo
