Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-28 Thread Urs Liska
David Kastrup schrieb: >Urs Liska writes: > >> I keep getting these messages although David has pushed the patch. >How >> can I (or someone) make the tracker aware of the push? > >Usually the state should be updated by the pusher. If you are aware of >an inconsistency, however, it won't go awa

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-28 Thread James
On 28/12/13 08:52, Urs Liska wrote: I keep getting these messages although David has pushed the patch. How can I (or someone) make the tracker aware of the push? Urs Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: lilyp...@googlecode.com Gesendet: Sat Dec 28 09:48:40 MEZ 2013 An: lilyli...@goo

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-28 Thread David Kastrup
Urs Liska writes: > I keep getting these messages although David has pushed the patch. How > can I (or someone) make the tracker aware of the push? Usually the state should be updated by the pusher. If you are aware of an inconsistency, however, it won't go away by ignoring it. I find it curio

Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-28 Thread Urs Liska
I keep getting these messages although David has pushed the patch. How can I (or someone) make the tracker aware of the push? Urs Ursprüngliche Nachricht Von: lilyp...@googlecode.com Gesendet: Sat Dec 28 09:48:40 MEZ 2013 An: lilyli...@googlemail.com Betreff: Re: Issue 3719 in

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-23 Thread David Kastrup
James writes: > On 23/12/13 12:26, Urs Liska wrote: >> Am 23.12.2013 13:02, schrieb David Kastrup: >>> Urs Liska writes: >>> Am 23.12.2013 12:45, schrieb Urs Liska: > Attached is an updated patch using @command instead of @code. > Rebased patch passes make doc (issues in other

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-23 Thread James
On 23/12/13 12:26, Urs Liska wrote: Am 23.12.2013 13:02, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Am 23.12.2013 12:45, schrieb Urs Liska: Attached is an updated patch using @command instead of @code. Rebased patch passes make doc (issues in other subthread solved). Thanks for pushing Urs

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-23 Thread David Kastrup
Urs Liska writes: > Am 23.12.2013 13:02, schrieb David Kastrup: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> Am 23.12.2013 12:45, schrieb Urs Liska: >>> Attached is an updated patch using @command instead of @code. Rebased patch passes make doc (issues in other subthread solved). Thanks for p

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-23 Thread Urs Liska
Am 23.12.2013 13:02, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Am 23.12.2013 12:45, schrieb Urs Liska: Attached is an updated patch using @command instead of @code. Rebased patch passes make doc (issues in other subthread solved). Thanks for pushing Urs Sorry, found an error after reading

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-23 Thread Urs Liska
Am 22.12.2013 12:06, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Am 22.12.2013 10:54, schrieb David Kastrup: I see that you used @code{vi} and @code{git-cl} rather than @command{vi} and @command{git-cl}: any particular reason for that? I was suggested to use that on Rietveld. So, no, no parti

Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-22 Thread Urs Liska
Original-Nachricht Betreff: Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor Datum: Sun, 22 Dec 2013 13:13:54 +0100 Von: Urs Liska An: David Kastrup Am 22.12.2013 11:59, schrieb Urs Liska: I don't see that logfile in input/regre

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-22 Thread David Kastrup
Urs Liska writes: > Am 22.12.2013 10:54, schrieb David Kastrup: > >> I see that you used @code{vi} and @code{git-cl} rather than @command{vi} >> and @command{git-cl}: any particular reason for that? > > I was suggested to use that on Rietveld. > So, no, no particular reason. Yes, I know: I'm not

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-22 Thread Urs Liska
Am 22.12.2013 10:54, schrieb David Kastrup: Urs Liska writes: Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch. I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code. make doc gave an error, but this pointed to "fatal error: failed files: "60/lily-338514d2.ly"" so I think I c

Re: Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-22 Thread David Kastrup
Urs Liska writes: > Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch. > > I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code. > > make doc gave an error, but this pointed to > "fatal error: failed files: "60/lily-338514d2.ly"" > so I think I can ignore this? Actually, you can'

Fwd: Re: Issue 3719 in lilypond: Patch: CG: Add comment about git-cl editor

2013-12-22 Thread Urs Liska
Would somebody please be so kind and push the attached patch. I rebased on origin/master and ran ct-section source-code. make doc gave an error, but this pointed to "fatal error: failed files: "60/lily-338514d2.ly"" so I think I can ignore this? Urs Original-Nachricht Betref