Carl Sorensen wrote Monday, December 28, 2009 5:25 AM
Oh, I agree that it would have the added benefit of a greater
audience, but
it would also cost more time for Mark to get it into the Git
documentation
instead of into the LilyPond documentation.
[...etc]
Many thanks, Carl. I had exactl
A related question, Does wish (and therefore lilypond-git) run in the
bash shell provided by git on Windows, if not, in the words of NASA:
"Houston, we have a problem. . ."
Cheers,
Ian
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://l
On 12/28/09 4:59 AM, "Ian Hulin" wrote:
> A related question, Does wish (and therefore lilypond-git) run in the
> bash shell provided by git on Windows, if not, in the words of NASA:
> "Houston, we have a problem. . ."
>
On my Parallels version of XP, when I downloaded and installed MsysGi
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:59:19AM +, Ian Hulin wrote:
> A related question, Does wish (and therefore lilypond-git) run in the
> bash shell provided by git on Windows, if not, in the words of NASA:
> "Houston, we have a problem. . ."
Dscho offered to make a custom git installer for window
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 6:22 PM, Mark Polesky wrote:
> You're proposing something like this?
>
> 1. Introduction to contributing
> 2. Working with source code
> 2.1 Using the `lilycontrib' GUI
> 2.2 Getting source with Git
> 2.2.1 [installing, configuring]
> 2.2.2 [downloading Lily
On 12/28/09 11:22 AM, "Mark Polesky" wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>> What about making 2.2 Getting source, then 2.3 basic
>> procedures, etc ? That way, all the git stuff is still in
>> the same chapter, but no section/subsection is
>> unreasonably long.
>
> You're proposing something lik
Graham Percival wrote:
>> A related question, Does wish (and therefore
>> lilypond-git) run in the bash shell provided by git on
>> Windows, if not, in the words of NASA: "Houston, we have
>> a problem. . ."
>
> Dscho offered to make a custom git installer for windows,
> which apparently would h
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Mark Polesky wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>> Dscho offered to make a custom git installer for windows,
>> which apparently would have this built-in.
>
> I'm currently on a Windows XP machine (just for this week);
...
> and it works fine.
ok, in that case let's
There are two make rules using a command like
find $(outdir)/$* -name '*.html' |
xargs grep -L --label="" 'UNTRANSLATED NODE: IGNORE ME' | ...
What's the reason for that `--label=""'? It's breaking the build
with OpenBSDs native grep (in /usr/bin/grep), and I don't see any
differe
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:43 PM, Colin Campbell wrote:
> A one of the newer of noobs, I can testify that the biggest problems I'm
> having with git are not seeing how git becomes aware of changes I might
> make: do I edit from within { git gui/gitk/lilycontrib } or use an external
> editor,
Start
Trevor Daniels wrote:
Carl Sorensen wrote Monday, December 28, 2009 5:25 AM
Oh, I agree that it would have the added benefit of a greater
audience, but
it would also cost more time for Mark to get it into the Git
documentation
instead of into the LilyPond documentation.
[...etc]
Many than
Graham Percival wrote:
> What about making 2.2 Getting source, then 2.3 basic
> procedures, etc ? That way, all the git stuff is still in
> the same chapter, but no section/subsection is
> unreasonably long.
You're proposing something like this?
1. Introduction to contributing
2. Working with so
2009/12/27 John Mandereau :
> Le dimanche 27 décembre 2009 à 14:34 +0100, John Mandereau a écrit :
>> Le dimanche 27 décembre 2009 à 01:02 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> > writing: /main/src/build-lilypond/./out-www/xref-maps/usage.fr.xref-map
>> > touch -r out-www/usage.texi
>> > /main/src/bu
---
GNUmakefile.in |2 +-
1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/GNUmakefile.in b/GNUmakefile.in
index 6574e65..6c2c54f 100644
--- a/GNUmakefile.in
+++ b/GNUmakefile.in
@@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ WWW-post:
$(buildscript-dir)/mutopia-index -o $(outdir)/examples.html inp
On 28/12/09 17:46, Graham Percival wrote:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Mark Polesky wrote:
Graham Percival wrote:
Dscho offered to make a custom git installer for windows,
which apparently would have this built-in.
I'm currently on a Windows XP machine (just for this week);
...
and it
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 19:35 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> 2009/12/27 John Mandereau :
> > Le dimanche 27 décembre 2009 à 14:34 +0100, John Mandereau a écrit :
> >> Ugh, this touch is unnecessary.
> >
> > I see, it was added because some translated Texinfo documents missed a
> > @document
On 12/28/09 12:54 PM, "Ian Hulin" wrote:
> On 28/12/09 17:46, Graham Percival wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 5:32 PM, Mark Polesky wrote:
>>> Graham Percival wrote:
Dscho offered to make a custom git installer for windows,
which apparently would have this built-in.
>>>
>>> I'm c
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 01:03:19PM -0700, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 12/28/09 12:54 PM, "Ian Hulin" wrote:
>
> > Mark, this means you've got the option in your re-design of the CG
> > chapter headings to have a split between
> > * contributors using the git GUI and lilypond-git (formerly lilyco
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 19:07 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> If you do "make EXTERNAL_BINARY doc", then you don't need "make" at all.
yes... except
make -C scripts && make -C python
Best,
John
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
_
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 09:15:50PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 19:07 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> > If you do "make EXTERNAL_BINARY doc", then you don't need "make" at all.
>
> yes... except
>
> make -C scripts && make -C python
Oh, it needs scripts? The CG
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 20:25 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 09:15:50PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> > make -C scripts && make -C python
>
> Oh, it needs scripts? The CG only mentions make -C python.
It has needed them since we started using build scripts in
scr
2009/12/28 John Mandereau :
> Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 20:25 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 09:15:50PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
>> > make -C scripts && make -C python
>>
>> Oh, it needs scripts? The CG only mentions make -C python.
>
> It has needed them since w
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 20:33 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> Ok, added.
Better would be adding this in the right makefile.
> That said, as far as I know nobody's used EXTERNAL_BINARY in at least
> half a year, so it's probably broken by now. It would be nice if
> somebody tried it out b
2009/12/28 John Mandereau :
> Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 20:33 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> Ok, added.
>
> Better would be adding this in the right makefile.
If you want to figure out how to do this, go ahead. But I thought the
general idea was to do the minimum amount of screwing with th
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 20:06 +0100, Matthias Kilian a écrit :
> There are two make rules using a command like
>
> find $(outdir)/$* -name '*.html' |
> xargs grep -L --label="" 'UNTRANSLATED NODE: IGNORE ME' | ...
>
> What's the reason for that `--label=""'? It's breaking the buil
Thanks, applied.
John
signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 21:00 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> If you want to figure out how to do this, go ahead. But I thought the
> general idea was to do the minimum amount of screwing with the old
> make system, and instead just to collect requests for the new build
> system?
Sure, for
Graham Percival wrote Monday, December 28, 2009 8:09 PM
Why discuss git gui at all? Just give the command-line options.
No. Git GUI and gitk provide a far easier way to work with
branches than the command line. If the intention is to help
people move up to developing why deliberately mak
2009/12/28 John Mandereau :
> Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 19:35 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> 2009/12/27 John Mandereau :
>> In git version
>> 17c304bf59498a0c19fbc215383a2ff333c7c184 I have the same problem:
>> cp -p web.texi out-www/web.texi
>
> Again, I don't know where this command come
Carl Sorensen wrote Monday, December 28, 2009 8:03 PM
Actually, I think it's a three-way split:
* those using lily-git (not lilypond-git, that's the name of the
directory)
This option requires no knowledge of git at all -- just use
the 3
buttons
* those using git gui
* those using g
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 21:10 +, Trevor Daniels a écrit :
> No. Git GUI and gitk provide a far easier way to work with
> branches than the command line. If the intention is to help
> people move up to developing why deliberately make it harder?
Sure. FWIW I use gitk as much as command
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 10:05:51PM +0100, John Mandereau wrote:
> > What's the reason for that `--label=""'? It's breaking the build
[...]
> The commit that added "--label" is
>
> commit d4401de33195113a8859629b4bd9483a03d9ab5c
> Author: Werner Lemberg
> Date: Thu Dec 14 15:28:27 2006 +0100
>
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 21:18 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> I found the same problem with a fresh build, but then I remembered
> that I'd switched back to 2.12.2 to build new regtests for the
> comparison to 2.12.3. When I switched back to master after that, git
> left some old files in
2009/12/28 John Mandereau :
>
> Did git issue some warnings about left files when switching back to
> 2.13?
I don't know; this was a few days ago.
Cheers,
- Graham
___
lilypond-devel mailing list
lilypond-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/lis
On 28/12/09 20:09, Graham Percival wrote:
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 01:03:19PM -0700, Carl Sorensen wrote:
On 12/28/09 12:54 PM, "Ian Hulin" wrote:
Why discuss git gui at all? Just give the command-line options.
If somebody just wants to get work done, they use lily-git.tcl.
If they
The below patch stops texi2html from creating two anchors, making the
webpage navigation much more comfortable. However, it also makes the
TOC navbars disappear. Valentin, could you fix the CSS so they don't
vanish?
Cheers,
- Graham
diff --git a/Documentation/lilypond-texi2html.init b/Document
On 12/28/09 2:31 PM, "John Mandereau" wrote:
> Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 21:18 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> I found the same problem with a fresh build, but then I remembered
>> that I'd switched back to 2.12.2 to build new regtests for the
>> comparison to 2.12.3. When I switched ba
Graham Percival wrote:
Start: blindly copy&paste from:
- 1.1.2
- 1.1.3
Then, before you start working each day, you blindly copy&paste the
first item from
- 1.2.2
Then you edit whatever file with whatever editor you want (graphical,
command-line, raw manipulation of bits on the hard drive by h
Carl Sorensen wrote:
If you're only working on docs (i.e. no code changes), there's no need to
run make before make doc, IIUC.
Carl
Noob question: is it likely that a change in the binary, overlooked by
not doing a make, would break the docs, in the sense of changing
documented behaviou
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:46 PM, Colin Campbell wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>
>
> A precis like this would be *gold* in the CG!
Heh, thanks. That's why I keep on arguing for a set of simple,
copy&pasteable commands.
Admittedly, the new lily-git does this already... say, have you tried
that
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Colin Campbell wrote:
> Carl Sorensen wrote:
>> If you're only working on docs (i.e. no code changes), there's no need to
>> run make before make doc, IIUC.
>
> Noob question: is it likely that a change in the binary, overlooked by not
> doing a make, would break
Le mardi 29 décembre 2009 à 00:00 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
> It's _just_ possible that some change won't be picked up by "make" and
> will require a rebuild from scratch, but this only occurs once or
> twice a year.
True, "make" is known to be more robust than "make doc" in non-clean
build
2009/12/29 John Mandereau :
> Le mardi 29 décembre 2009 à 00:00 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
>> If "make" ever ends with an error, just send it to
>> lilypond-devel.
>
> ... and monitor -devel list for messages about infrastructure changes
> where a developper explicitly requests everybody to
I've been continuing to work on the logical structure of autobeaming rules,
because the rules aren't right yet. There are still some rules that don't
make sense, and in trying to make things make sense, I've run into some
philosophical issues.
I'm starting to believe that there should be a contex
Le lundi 28 décembre 2009 à 19:11 -0700, Carl Sorensen a écrit :
> I've been continuing to work on the logical structure of autobeaming rules,
> because the rules aren't right yet. There are still some rules that don't
> make sense, and in trying to make things make sense, I've run into some
> phi
Graham Percival wrote:
2009/12/29 John Mandereau :
Le mardi 29 décembre 2009 à 00:00 +, Graham Percival a écrit :
If "make" ever ends with an error, just send it to
lilypond-devel.
... and monitor -devel list for messages about infrastructure changes
where a developper explicitly request
On Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 08:26:51PM -0700, Colin Campbell wrote:
> Graham Percival wrote:
>> I don't think we should ask new contributors to do this. I've added
>> it to the CG as a responsibility for mentors to inform their
>> contributors if they'll need a make clean or make doc-clean.
>
> It see
Matthias Kilian writes:
> ---
> GNUmakefile.in |2 +-
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/GNUmakefile.in b/GNUmakefile.in
> index 6574e65..6c2c54f 100644
> --- a/GNUmakefile.in
> +++ b/GNUmakefile.in
> @@ -123,7 +123,7 @@ WWW-post:
> $(buildscript-dir)/m
48 matches
Mail list logo
