Carl,
2012/2/11 Carl Sorensen :
> I'm trying to see if it's possible to keep support for OSX 10.4, and at
> the same time, have the proper version of lilypond shown in the About box.
You are _amazing_! You do everything and help everyone.
> In order to try to track this down, I'd like to have a
"m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
> On Feb 10, 2012, at 7:35 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> "m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
>>
>>> The problem is that the Pango API does not allow multiplication
>>> between two arbitrary matrices.
>>
>> Hm? What's wrong with pango_matrix_concat ?
>
>
> Missed th
Carl Sorensen writes:
> On 2/10/12 12:52 PM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>>
>>Sure thing. When this will be going on countdown, I was also going to
>>copy it to the user list. I also plan on mentioning it in the next
>>LilyPond Report (no idea about when I'll be working seriously on that,
>>hopeful
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2012/2/9 Graham Percival :
>> Does anybody feel like submitting a proposal to google summer of
>> code? IIRC students must be registered at a school, so this isn't
>> something that would help any senior developer, but it's still
>> $5500 for any student that ends up work
carl.d.soren...@gmail.com writes:
> Thanks for taking this on, Janek.
>
> I don't know what the response will be to for_UP_and_DOWN(d). The last
> time somebody proposed a change, it was resisted because the do{}
> flip(d)!=UP idiom seemed simple enough to be acceptable.
>
> But I think the new i
Janek Warchoł writes:
> 2012/2/10 Pavel Roskin :
>> Hello!
>>
>> There is a strange suggestion in Documentation/notation/spacing.itely:
>>
>>
>> @item ragged-last-bottom
>> @funindex ragged-last-bottom
>>
>> If set to false, systems will spread vertically down the last
>> page. Pieces t
2012/2/10 David Kastrup :
>* Don't get me wrong: it is probably quite enough work for getting someone*
>* started. I'm just not sure whether it will be easy to sell it off. The*
>* largest part of the work would realistically consist in digging oneself*
>* into sparsely documented areas, just in
On 2012/02/10 23:49:24, Carl wrote:
Thanks for taking this on, Janek.
I don't know what the response will be to for_UP_and_DOWN(d). The
last time
somebody proposed a change, it was resisted because the do{}
flip(d)!=UP idiom
seemed simple enough to be acceptable.
It took us a while to f
Forgot about one thing, sorry
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/note-collision.cc
File lily/note-collision.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/note-collision.cc#newcode552
lily/note-collision.cc:552: for_UP_and_DOWN (d) // please, make a
comment to this
Łukasz Czerwiński writes:
> 2012/2/10 David Kastrup :
>> Don't get me wrong: it is probably quite enough work for getting someone
>> started. I'm just not sure whether it will be easy to sell it off. The
>> largest part of the work would realistically consist in digging oneself
>> into sparsely
2012/2/11 David Kastrup :
> Łukasz Czerwiński writes:
>
>> 2012/2/10 David Kastrup :
>>> Don't get me wrong: it is probably quite enough work for getting someone
>>> started. I'm just not sure whether it will be easy to sell it off. The
>>> largest part of the work would realistically consist in
Am 09.02.2012 um 17:26 schrieb Phil Holmes:
> - Original Message - From: "Han-Wen Nienhuys"
> To: "Carl Sorensen"
>
>>> C) Development of score_ocr2ly, which would take a score pdf and turn it
>>> into .ly files matching the lilypond scoring standard
>>
>> Heh. This is a known proble
- Original Message -
From: "pls"
To: "Phil Holmes"
> There are a number of commercial products that, given a perfect
> representation of a score, convert it to perfect musicXML - so it can't
> be that hard.
Hm, could you name some, please? I haven't come across such a product,
yet
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/accidental-placement.cc
File lily/accidental-placement.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/accidental-placement.cc#newcode211
lily/accidental-placement.cc:211: * @return A vector of
Accidental_placement_entrys
Do you mea
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:32:11AM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> 2012/2/11 Carl Sorensen :
> > In order to try to track this down, I'd like to have a git history to see
> > how things have changed. [...]
> > Can anybody tell me where I might find an up-to-date repository?
http://git.savannah.gnu.o
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:59:12AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Janek Warchoł writes:
>
> > So, are there any reasons not to do it?
>
> I don't think so.
Time+effort required to write a proposal. Would you be happy
delaying the 2.16 for, say, a month, while we spend effort writing
that propos
Graham Percival writes:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:59:12AM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Janek Warchoł writes:
>>
>> > So, are there any reasons not to do it?
>>
>> I don't think so.
>
> Time+effort required to write a proposal.
I would expect the "student" to do most of that. It would be
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 01:43:06PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Time+effort required to write a proposal.
>
> I would expect the "student" to do most of that.
I believe that one of the major things that GSoC looks are is "how
good is the list of tasks suggested by
new patch set uploaded, please review.
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/note-collision.cc
File lily/note-collision.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/1/lily/note-collision.cc#newcode588
lily/note-collision.cc:588: {
On 2012/02/11 12:32:57, Milimetr88 wrote:
W dniu 11 lutego 2012 13:33 użytkownik Graham Percival
napisał:
> Time+effort required to write a proposal. Would you be happy
> delaying the 2.16 for, say, a month, while we spend effort writing
> that proposal (which may or may not be accepted) ? When all's
> said and done, I wouldn't be surpr
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 02:32:31PM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
> W dniu 11 lutego 2012 13:33 użytkownik Graham Percival
> napisał:
> > Time+effort required to write a proposal. Would you be happy
> > delaying the 2.16 for, say, a month, while we spend effort writing
> > that proposal (which may o
Please see commit:
6c6f97dcb49afb3aaa9480eece124d11a6c48975
This changes the words around an illustration of the syntax of printing
woodwind key lists, replacing an inline snippet with text. The benefit of
this is that the snippet is no longer run during a make doc, and therefore
the key lis
W dniu 11 lutego 2012 14:45 użytkownik Graham Percival
napisał:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 02:32:31PM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> We can set prerequisites like C++, git and music (notation) knowledge,
>> so that we won't have to mentor people about this (takes a lot of
>> time).
>
> Agreed about
W dniu 11 lutego 2012 13:30 użytkownik Graham Percival
napisał:
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:32:11AM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> I think this is a lesson for us all.
>
> Yes, and that lesson is "when Graham tries to off-load mundane
> administrative tasks, somebody do it, because you want him t
Reviewers: dak, Graham Percival, Julien Rioux,
Message:
Latest GOP 9 make doc reduction - please review.
Description:
I've opened a new issue to avoid confusion. AFAICS this redirects all
the output from texi2pdf, makeinfo and tex2html to logfiles. I've used
Julien and David's suggestion of ge
philehol...@googlemail.com writes:
> Reviewers: dak, Graham Percival, Julien Rioux,
>
> Message:
> Latest GOP 9 make doc reduction - please review.
>
> Description:
> I've opened a new issue to avoid confusion. AFAICS this redirects all
> the output from texi2pdf, makeinfo and tex2html to logfile
- Original Message -
From: "David Kastrup"
To:
Cc: ; ;
Sent: Saturday, February 11, 2012 5:20 PM
Subject: Re: Final redirection of texi output (issue 5650064)
philehol...@googlemail.com writes:
Reviewers: dak, Graham Percival, Julien Rioux,
Message:
Latest GOP 9 make doc reduct
On 2/11/12 5:30 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 09:32:11AM +0100, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> 2012/2/11 Carl Sorensen :
>> > In order to try to track this down, I'd like to have a git history to
>>see
>> > how things have changed. [...]
>> > Can anybody tell me where I might fin
On 2011/10/24 09:47:45, Reinhold wrote:
LGTM.
Hi,
I know it's only a one-liner but it still fixes a bus error. Is there
any specific reason why this patch has never been pushed?
Thanks
patrick
http://codereview.appspot.com/5303063/
___
lilypond-de
On 2012/02/11 20:55:34, pl_s wrote:
I know it's only a one-liner but it still fixes a bus error. Is there
any
specific reason why this patch has never been pushed?
It was pushed a week ago?
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1985
You're the only person that can close this cod
On 2012/02/11 21:01:04, Graham Percival wrote:
On 2012/02/11 20:55:34, pl_s wrote:
> I know it's only a one-liner but it still fixes a bus error. Is
there any
> specific reason why this patch has never been pushed?
It was pushed a week ago?
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=
2012/2/11 Phil Holmes :
> Please see commit:
>
> 6c6f97dcb49afb3aaa9480eece124d11a6c48975
>
> This changes the words around an illustration of the syntax of printing
> woodwind key lists, replacing an inline snippet with text. The benefit of
> this is that the snippet is no longer run during a mak
On Feb 11, 2012, at 9:49 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> "m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
>
>> On Feb 10, 2012, at 7:35 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>>> "m...@apollinemike.com" writes:
>>>
The problem is that the Pango API does not allow multiplication
between two arbitrary matrices.
>>>
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/5002/lily/note-collision.cc
File lily/note-collision.cc (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/5651069/diff/5002/lily/note-collision.cc#newcode191
lily/note-collision.cc:191: */
Protect the comment formatting with a column of '*'s
Otherwise, someone mig
34 matches
Mail list logo
