So... as far as the Bug Squad is concerned, are we still waiting for
something or does this need to get added to the tracker?
Thanks,
Mark
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 1:52 AM, m...@apollinemike.com <
m...@apollinemike.com> wrote:
> On Apr 20, 2012, at 7:40 AM, James wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > On 20
Hi bug-squad,
On 22/04/12 06:39, James wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 22 April 2012 04:12, Mark Mathias wrote:
>> So... as far as the Bug Squad is concerned, are we still waiting
>> for something or does this need to get added to the tracker?
>> Thanks, Mark
>>
>
> As far as the bug squad are concern
Hello,
On 22 April 2012 04:12, Mark Mathias wrote:
> So... as far as the Bug Squad is concerned, are we still waiting for
> something or does this need to get added to the tracker?
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
As far as the bug squad are concerned - being one myself - we'd like a
confirmation that this is
James writes:
> Hello,
>
> On 20 April 2012 00:40, Nick Payne wrote:
>> The documentation at
>> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation/creating-footnotes for
>> both automatic and manual footnotes says that the \footnote command must
>> come *before* the grob to which the footnote
On Apr 20, 2012, at 7:40 AM, James wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On 20 April 2012 00:40, Nick Payne wrote:
>> The documentation at
>> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation/creating-footnotes for
>> both automatic and manual footnotes says that the \footnote command must
>> come *before* the
Hello,
On 20 April 2012 00:40, Nick Payne wrote:
> The documentation at
> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/notation/creating-footnotes for
> both automatic and manual footnotes says that the \footnote command must
> come *before* the grob to which the footnote is being attached. This d
