Hi David,
On 29/10/11 13:22, David Kastrup wrote:
> Ian Hulin writes:
>
>> Hi David, I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think
>> you're trying to amend a section of manual here that needs a
>> re-think/re-write.
>
> No flame war intended. As I said: I can't expend the effort to do
Ian Hulin writes:
> Hi David,
> I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think you're trying to
> amend a section of manual here that needs a re-think/re-write.
No flame war intended. As I said: I can't expend the effort to do this
well. I got annoyed by wrong information and corrected
On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 12:09:03PM +0100, Ian Hulin wrote:
> I can have a look at this section and think about a redraft. Carl, do
> you have enough time to review a draft for Scheme-fu if I write the
> first draft in OpenOffice Write?
A rewrite sounds good, but I heavily discourage openoffice. J
Hi David,
I don't want to get into a flame war here, as I think you're trying to
amend a section of manual here that needs a re-think/re-write.
I came to this conclusion when I noticed one place where it looked
like you were thinking in German, and made a common mistake in the
English version thro
Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com, Ian Hulin (gmail),
Message:
On 2011/10/28 23:04:31, Ian Hulin (gmail) wrote:
David,
I think you've updated an example in two places, and added material
which needs
to reference the second example after the first one.
I disagree. I see only one example h
David,
I think you've updated an example in two places, and added material
which needs to reference the second example after the first one. You're
trying to describe things about coding within music functions before the
text gets round to mentioning them. This section is trying to hand-hold
the r
LGTM
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/5314065/
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
