Il 10/03/2013 01:44, Julien Rioux ha scritto:
Yes, CG does lists metapost. But this peckage was not auto-installed
as a dependency from other previous packages.
I agree that this looks like something that the configure script should
have caught. Thanks for reporting it, we should open an issue
Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
> Le 09/03/2013 18:03, David Kastrup disait :
>> Jean-Charles Malahieude writes:
>>
>>> Hi David,
>>>
>>> What would be more appropriate to have
>>> master->translation->staging ?
>>>
>>> Before applying tracker 3229, between 3229 and 3231, or after 3231?
>>
>> [.
Le 10/03/2013 08:00, David Kastrup disait :
David Kastrup writes:
Removed that commit from staging. It should be fixed in the
translation branch.
I mean: it is currently broken in the translation branch and should get
fixed in the translation branch before trying the merge again.
Now fix
- Original Message -
From: "Ian Hulin"
To:
Sent: Saturday, March 09, 2013 3:38 PM
Subject: Back on board
Hi all,
This is just to let you know I'm finally back home working from my
desktop machine after a long break without access to an Internet
connection.
I'm just catching up with
- Original Message -
From: "Julien Rioux"
To: "LilyPond Devel"
Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 12:50 AM
Subject: Re: Alternative pixel-based regtest checker
On 01/03/2013 2:15 PM, Phil Holmes wrote:
4 files attached. To try this out: create a new directory and place
NoTagline.ly in it
Anders
On 9 March 2013 19:57, Anders Pilegaard wrote:
> Hello all.
>
> This is getting a bit long, so here's a brief overview of what's in
> this mail:
>
> - I'm proposing a patch ...
>
Thanks for that.
You'll likely get (more) reviews and comments if you use our normal
process, see:
http://
Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
unpopular.
2.16 is growing old. Now you might go "Huh?", but here are salient
points:
a) \override/\revert syntax is increasingly becoming an issue on the
mailing list. There are also related commands that are affected.
On 10 mars 2013, at 18:32, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
> unpopular.
There's a time of the year for that?
> It also means that commits of the "this really does nothing, but it
> prepares the ground for $xxx, and I don't know j
"m...@mikesolomon.org" writes:
> On 10 mars 2013, at 18:32, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make
> myself
> unpopular.
>
> There's a time of the year for that?
>
> It also means that commits of the "this really does nothing, bu
Am 10.03.2013 18:32, schrieb David Kastrup:
Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
unpopular.
[...]
So I want to see 2.18 soon. That means we need to stabilize work that
has already been done and cut down on experiments in the master branch.
Stabilizing means
I accidentally mucked up some of my GUB set up, so have been essentially
rebuilding from scratch. In doing so, I get this error:
/home/gub/gub/target/darwin-ppc/src/lilypond-git.sv.gnu.org--lilypond.git-release-unstable/lily/unpure-pure-container.cc:140:
error: initializing argument 2 of 'vo
On 10 mars 2013, at 18:54, David Kastrup wrote:
> "m...@mikesolomon.org" writes:
>
>> On 10 mars 2013, at 18:32, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make
>> myself
>> unpopular.
>>
>> There's a time of the year for that?
>>
>> It a
Marc Hohl writes:
> Am 10.03.2013 18:32, schrieb David Kastrup:
>> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
>> unpopular.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> So I want to see 2.18 soon. That means we need to stabilize work that
>> has already been done and cut down on experiments in
Am 10.03.2013 20:56, schrieb David Kastrup:
Marc Hohl writes:
Am 10.03.2013 18:32, schrieb David Kastrup:
Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
unpopular.
[...]
So I want to see 2.18 soon. That means we need to stabilize work that
has already been done and
m...@mikesolomon.org writes:
> On 10 mars 2013, at 18:54, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> "m...@mikesolomon.org" writes:
>>
>>> On 10 mars 2013, at 18:32, David Kastrup wrote:
>>>
>>> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make
>>> myself
>>> unpopular.
>>>
>>> There's a
On 10 March 2013 20:56, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> I think there have been two issues crystallized out from it.
>
> a) \bar "|:" and \bar ":|" are a frequent cause for surprise, and the
>return value one gets for dealing with that surprise, a direct way
>for specifying the desired look for t
> So, to resume, I agree that a freeze is important. When the freeze
> kicks in, I'd rather that we say something like "no new big projects
> starting on date X will be part of 2.18" so that developers can plan
> out their next few months accordingly.
+1
Werner
___
Xavier Scheuer writes:
> On 10 March 2013 20:56, David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> I think there have been two issues crystallized out from it.
>>
>> a) \bar "|:" and \bar ":|" are a frequent cause for surprise, and the
>>return value one gets for dealing with that surprise, a direct way
>>for
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> So, to resume, I agree that a freeze is important. When the freeze
>> kicks in, I'd rather that we say something like "no new big projects
>> starting on date X will be part of 2.18" so that developers can plan
>> out their next few months accordingly.
>
> +1
Well, "ne
> I just put out the announcement because I feel we should now stop
> accumulating stuff that will require half a year to reach a stable
> state. We need to focus on dealing with what we have in the queue
> right now rather than heaving new things into master that will be
> beneficial to end user
On 10 March 2013 22:05, David Kastrup wrote:
>
> (snip)
>
> If a refined interface can defuse these cases as well, it would
> certainly seem like a good step to take.
Thank you for this wise message.
> Well, the question is always the balance between gain and pain. Where
> the pain is not an im
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> I just put out the announcement because I feel we should now stop
>> accumulating stuff that will require half a year to reach a stable
>> state. We need to focus on dealing with what we have in the queue
>> right now rather than heaving new things into master that will
Hi,
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 6:32 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Ok folks, it is this time of the year again: I am trying to make myself
> unpopular.
>
> I want to see 2.18 soon. That means we need to stabilize work that
> has already been done and cut down on experiments in the master branch.
I agr
Werner LEMBERG writes:
>> So, to resume, I agree that a freeze is important. When the freeze
>> kicks in, I'd rather that we say something like "no new big projects
>> starting on date X will be part of 2.18" so that developers can plan
>> out their next few months accordingly.
>
> +1
Actually,
Hello,
On 10 March 2013 21:58, Anders Pilegaard wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 3:12 PM, James wrote:
>
>>
>> You'll likely get (more) reviews and comments if you use our normal
>> process, see:
>>
>>
>> http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.17/Documentation/contributor-big-page.html#uploading-a-patch-fo
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:22:57PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
> /home/gub/gub/target/darwin-ppc/src/lilypond-git.sv.gnu.org--lilypond.git-release-unstable/lily/unpure-pure-container.cc:140:
> error: initializing argument 2 of 'void
> scm_set_smob_apply(scm_t_bits, scm_unused_struct* (*)(...), unsi
Hi,
since Mike is very busy i decided to post some of my questions to the list.
I'm working on simplifying self_alignment_interface - i hope to unify
different methods that are used now into one versatile and more
powerful method.
Currently virtually all grobs are aligned relative to their parent
Graham Percival writes:
> On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 06:22:57PM -, Phil Holmes wrote:
>> /home/gub/gub/target/darwin-ppc/src/lilypond-git.sv.gnu.org--lilypond.git-release-unstable/lily/unpure-pure-container.cc:140:
>> error: initializing argument 2 of 'void
>> scm_set_smob_apply(scm_t_bits, sc
> What i would like: specify the reference grob in a property, for
> example
>
> \override LyricText #'align-to = #'Stem
>
> and then have one callback function that would be smart enough to
> find appropriate grob to use and feed it to the method calculating
> alignment.
>From an API point of
29 matches
Mail list logo
