> BTW, I completely agree this thread was not handled well, not only
> by me, but by everyone from its inception to the present entry which
> I hope is its termination. Quite an ugly business! Very bad form
> shown by all! I do offer my apologies for my part, and yes - by all
> means I hope ever
BTW, I completely agree this thread was not handled well, not only by
me, but by everyone from its inception to the present entry which I
hope is its termination. Quite an ugly business! Very bad form shown
by all! I do offer my apologies for my part, and yes - by all means
I hope everyone
Hi Johannes.
On May 12, 2009, at 3:36 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Aaron,
by sending a private exchange you proved something. You still have
not
earned respect with this person.
Look, I understand a dev list is for developers. These posts of mine
have been commentary. If what I
Hi Aaron,
by sending a private exchange you proved something. You still have not
earned respect with this person.
I would have appreciated a lot of things, such as actually addressing the
original poster's (maybe poorly formulated) concern.
I would have appreciated something which benefits me
From: Johannes Schindelin
Aaron, it would be good to earn some respect here, presumably by
contributing something others benefit from, before you give up the
respect
already.
David might not be the most polite person on earth, but he did at
least
something useful before he went on to bash
Hi,
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Aaron Andrew Hunt wrote:
> >People like you seem to confuse the concept of "polite" with "servant".
>
> Ah yes, people like me. People who confuse concepts. People who are not
> as brilliant as yourself.
Aaron, it would be good to earn some respect here, presumably by
Hello Mr. Kastrup.
People like you seem to confuse the concept of "polite" with
"servant".
Ah yes, people like me. People who confuse concepts. People who are
not as brilliant as yourself.
You are illustrating my point exactly, Mr. Kastrup.
You presume to know who I am, what I do, and w
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 05:15:33PM +0200, Mats Bengtsson wrote:
> For example, Graham has worked day and night during more
> than a year to bring the documentation into it's current shape and I
> understand that he can feel personally insulted if someone dares
> criticize his own "baby".
It
Anyway, it's not a matter a being programmer/hacker or not, it's rather
a matter of being extremely enthusiastic about your own pet project and
of working extremely hard on something without getting paid (in money or
in gratitude). For example, Graham has worked day and night during more
than a
Aaron Andrew Hunt writes:
> On May 11, 2009, at 2:24 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
>> Dewdman,
>> It might help to read this:
>> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html
>
> Very interesting link! It might as well be called "In Defense of Being
> a Complete A-Hole"
>
> No
Dewdman42 writes:
> Quite unfortunate though, lilypond is an extremely cool technology
> that MANY MANY people are missing out on because of things like this
> and particularly because of the attitude of the core developers, who
> are the only ones that really know how the hell it works. I'm a
>
> But, the key players dismissed it, did nothing and yes...2 years
> later I am a bit frustrated. My post yesterday asking why after 2
> years nothing had been done, was not really too out of line if you
> think about it.
One of the key players, Rune, has passed away.
We can answer your request
In message , Aaron Andrew
Hunt writes
On May 11, 2009, at 2:24 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
Dewdman,
It might help to read this:
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html
Very interesting link! It might as well be called "In Defense of Being
a Complete A-Hole"
It
Hi,
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Aaron Andrew Hunt wrote:
> On May 11, 2009, at 2:24 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
> >Dewdman,
> >It might help to read this:
> >http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html
>
> Very interesting link! It might as well be called "In Defense of Being a
Aaron Andrew Hunt wrote:
On May 11, 2009, at 2:24 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
Dewdman,
It might help to read this:
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html
Very interesting link! It might as well be called "In Defense of Being a
Complete A-Hole"
No, programmers /
In message <23486715.p...@talk.nabble.com>, Dewdman42
writes
If I knew how I would. isn't it obvious that a few people hold the power to
control the development of lilypond while the rest of us are mere mortals?
It's Free Software. "He who puts in the effort makes the rules". I had a
project
On May 11, 2009, at 2:24 PM, lilypond-devel-requ...@gnu.org wrote:
Dewdman,
It might help to read this:
http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Essays/smart-questions.html
Very interesting link! It might as well be called "In Defense of
Being a Complete A-Hole"
No, programmers / hackers are smart folks a
Graham Percival wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 10:22:02AM -0700, Dewdman42 wrote:
But, the key players dismissed it, did nothing and yes...2 years later I am
a bit frustrated. My post yesterday asking why after 2 years nothing had
been done, was not really too out of line if you think about it.
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 10:22:02AM -0700, Dewdman42 wrote:
>
> But, the key players dismissed it, did nothing and yes...2 years later I am
> a bit frustrated. My post yesterday asking why after 2 years nothing had
> been done, was not really too out of line if you think about it.
That's garbag
Here is the original thread from the user list, where I did ask politely and
provided many screen shots and as much info as possible.
http://www.nabble.com/PDF-Problem-td11699420.html#a11699420
Grahmn acted like his usual elitist self, but I temporarily ignored him and
continued pleading.
Am 11.05.2009 um 18:46 schrieb Dewdman42:
I will just check back in a few years then to see if Lilypond becomes
useable for the rest of us and you scheme heads can play around in
your
little pond by yourselves.
And I'm sure the lilypond community will be diminished by not having
your pres
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 1:46 PM, Dewdman42 wrote:
> didn't. The only response is "fix it yourself"?
>
> That's not a realistic response, THAT is a BS response from someone who does
> not give a damn about the lilypond user community.
It's the response to someone who does not give a damn about t
Dewdman, the bigger problem is your initial email, which is itself
hostile and insulting:
Dewdman42 wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Dewdman42 wrote:
2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so that it can
create
PDF's that actually look good in acroread?
(sigh)
You ou
Wow, I see that after 2 years you still haven't stopped acting like a jerk
yet either Grahm. Bravo mate.
I will just check back in a few years then to see if Lilypond becomes
useable for the rest of us and you scheme heads can play around in your
little pond by yourselves.
Quite unfortunate t
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 09:27:48AM -0700, Dewdman42 wrote:
>
> If I knew how I would. isn't it obvious that a few people hold the power to
> control the development of lilypond while the rest of us are mere mortals?
BS. You're human, we're human. If we can do it (after months or
years of learn
If I knew how I would. isn't it obvious that a few people hold the power to
control the development of lilypond while the rest of us are mere mortals?
Han-Wen Nienhuys-5 wrote:
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Dewdman42 wrote:
>>
>> 2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Dewdman42 wrote:
>
> 2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so that it can create
> PDF's that actually look good in acroread?
>
> (sigh)
>
Yes, it is sad. You would almost think that noone gets paid to fix
user complaints.
Oh, wait.
--
Han-We
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 01:50:02AM -0700, Dewdman42 wrote:
>
> 2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so that it can create
> PDF's that actually look good in acroread?
>
> (sigh)
I agree. Why haven't you bothered to submit patches to fix this?
- Graham
___
2 years and still nobody has bothered to fix lilypond so that it can create
PDF's that actually look good in acroread?
(sigh)
I thought Rune was on to some good stuff there in 2007 and it appears nobody
would listen. Thanks Rune for your efforts in 2007, but I'm sorry to hear
that it was droppe
2007/7/20, Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
You are right - the problem is not really related to this.
I still think that we should change to 1/72 inch instead if 1/72.27 inch
because this way all staff lines will have same distance on paper and on
screen, whereas with 1/72.27 it may seldomly ha
Han-Wen Nienhuys skrev:
Sounds like bullock's manure to me.
You are right - the problem is not really related to this.
I still think that we should change to 1/72 inch instead if 1/72.27 inch
because this way all staff lines will have same distance on paper and on
screen, whereas with 1/72.2
2007/7/19, Rune Zedeler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I understand why the viewers have problems with lilypond's pdfs: For
some reason lilypond does loads of conversions to and from millimeters.
I think it has something to do with lily defining one point to be
1/72.27 inch, whereas a postscript (and pdf)
That looks loads better to me. One question, when you say screen optimize
option, will the print output of such a PDF be compromised in any way?
I don't know anything about lily internals, but something tells me the soft
rectangle have a lot to do with why ly output looks so nice on paper. ??
Rune Zedeler skrev:
I understand why the viewers have problems with lilypond's pdfs: For
some reason lilypond does loads of conversions to and from millimeters.
Oh, I never learn not to post comments late at night.
The above really had nothing (afaics) to do with the problem.
It should be fai
Okay, I took a look.
I understand why the viewers have problems with lilypond's pdfs: For
some reason lilypond does loads of conversions to and from millimeters.
I think it has something to do with lily defining one point to be
1/72.27 inch, whereas a postscript (and pdf) point is 1/72 inch.
The
35 matches
Mail list logo
