PATCHES: Countdown for Jan 12th - 06:00 GMT

Hello 3764

Re: Run grand-replace to update copyright

On Sun, Jan 05, 2014 at 10:38:04AM +0100, Werner LEMBERG wrote: > > > I do not believe that there is a notion of "package" copyright in > > most countries' laws. > > On page > http://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/html_node/Copyright-Notices.html > I see this: > > To update the list of year numbe

Re: Web:Introduction: Rename "Our Goal" box (issue 48430043)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/48430043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Web:Background: Reword introductory paragraph (issue 48360044)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/48360044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Web:Examples: Enclose in box (issue 48450044)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/48450044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: Web:Productions: Add title box (issue 38560044)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/38560044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Web: Replaced Debian Logo w/the 'open use' version (issue 43990047)

LGTM, thanks for taking care of this! Note that once this is pushed, that script that updates the pictures in lilypond-extra git will need to run. It _shouldn't_ require any manual attention on lilypond.org. https://codereview.appspot.com/43990047/ _

Re: Doc: simplify \score description, matching its current syntax (issue 47900043)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/47900043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: DOC: CG: Add information on texlive-lang-cyrillic (Issue 3774) (issue 47870045)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/47870045/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: DOC: CG: Add mirror for LilyDev (Issue 3775) (issue 47890043)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/47890043/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

redirect old /web/ to homepage - issue 1272 (issue 47860043)

probably ok, but I'm not an expert on .htaccess. Note that Phil will need to run "update security scripts" or whatever they're called. "trusted-scripts", maybe. All the steps should be documented in the CG website section on uploading on security. https://codereview.appspot.com/47860043/diff/

3.0?

Please don't beat me up, but that's something I wondered about for quite some time: Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? I mean 2.0 followed on 1.8, and now we're already towards .20 Is there any general idea about what would make the next major program version? Urs -- Urs Liska

LP version predicates

Is there already a clean way to let LilyPond/Scheme code be executed depending on the version number of the currently executed LilyPond? If not, would it be useful/acceptable to include something like https://github.com/openlilylib/snippets/blob/master/general-tools/lilypond-version-predicates/d

Re: 3.0?

Urs Liska writes: > Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? I could imagine that if LilyPond were made into an engraving library, and/or heavy rewiring to make it deeply integrated with a gui, or accept another native input language like the lilypond-driven fixed fresh release of MusicX

Re: 3.0?

- Original Message - From: "Urs Liska" To: "LilyPond Development Team" Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2014 10:53 AM Subject: 3.0? Please don't beat me up, but that's something I wondered about for quite some time: Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? I mean 2.0 followed on

Re: 3.0?

Am 09.01.2014 12:03, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: Urs Liska writes: Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? I could imagine that if LilyPond were made into an engraving library, and/or heavy rewiring to make it deeply integrated with a gui, Hm, this is something I was also thinking

midi control done twice

Using tt.ly: \version "2.19.0" \score { \new Staff { \set Staff.midiInstrument = #"electric bass (finger)" % 34 \set Staff.midiPanPosition = #0 a'1 } \midi { } } and midi.pl: #!/usr/bin/perl -w use strict; use MIDI; my $file; foreach $file (@ARGV) { my $opus = MIDI::Op

Re: 3.0?

On Jan 9, 2014, at 1:07 PM, Urs Liska wrote: > Am 09.01.2014 12:03, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? >> >> I could imagine that if LilyPond were made into an engraving library, >> and/or heavy rewiring to make it deeply in

Re: 3.0?

On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 12:07:07PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote: > But it would probably make it more attractive for the consumer > market if it had a nice default GUI. I personally would be pleased > to see Frescobaldi become such a default GUI (of course not cutting > out other options). Particularly g

Re: Fwd: Re: Images on "Introduction" and "Features"

Am 07.01.2014 10:31, schrieb Urs Liska: Original-Nachricht Betreff: Re: Images on "Introduction" and "Features" Datum: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 10:30:51 +0100 Von: Urs Liska An: Graham Percival Am 03.01.2014 15:37, schrieb Urs Liska: Graham Percival schrieb: On Fri, Jan 03, 2

Re: Fwd: Re: Images on "Introduction" and "Features"

- Original Message - From: "Urs Liska" However, independently from this concrete image: What is the way to add new images to the website/docs? I suppose they somehow have to get into the lilypond-extra repo? Yes, IIRC. I can do that, as can GP. I don't know who else has push acc

Re: 3.0?

Urs Liska writes: > Am 09.01.2014 12:03, schrieb Jan Nieuwenhuizen: >> Urs Liska writes: >> >>> Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? >> >> I could imagine that if LilyPond were made into an engraving library, >> and/or heavy rewiring to make it deeply integrated with a gui, > > Hm, t

Re: 3.0?

Urs Liska writes: > Please don't beat me up, but that's something I wondered about for > quite some time: > Is there _any_ notion what a LilyPond 3.0 may be? > I mean 2.0 followed on 1.8, and now we're already towards .20 > > Is there any general idea about what would make the next major program

Re: 3.0?

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 6:20 AM, David Kastrup wrote: > Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow > that strongly penalizes manual tweaks. Graphically/manually oriented > workflows detract from the importance of getting good default > typesetting. I don't know that I ag

Re: 3.0?

Carl Peterson: ... > Now, consider an IDE/GUI setup > (perhaps an extension of Frescobaldi) that would allow me to define a > variable for a voice, then pop up a musical staff to enter and play > back the notes for that variable without dealing with the whole > compilation process. No manual tweaki

Re: 3.0?

On 09/01/14 12:20, David Kastrup wrote: Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow that strongly penalizes manual tweaks. Graphically/manually oriented workflows detract from the importance of getting good default typesetting. I'm not sure that's necessarily the case.

Re: 3.0?

Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > On 09/01/14 12:20, David Kastrup wrote: >> Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow >> that strongly penalizes manual tweaks. Graphically/manually oriented >> workflows detract from the importance of getting good default >> typesettin

Re: 3.0?

David Kastrup schrieb: >Joseph Rushton Wakeling writes: > >> On 09/01/14 12:20, David Kastrup wrote: >>> Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow >>> that strongly penalizes manual tweaks. Graphically/manually >oriented >>> workflows detract from the importance of g

Re: Web:Background: Reword introductory paragraph (issue 48360044)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/48360044/diff/1/Documentation/web/introduction.itexi File Documentation/web/introduction.itexi (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/48360044/diff/1/Documentation/web/introduction.itexi#newcode554 Documentation/web/introduction.itexi:554: This is interestin

Re: Web:Productions: Add title box (issue 38560044)

LGTM https://codereview.appspot.com/38560044/ ___ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel

Re: redirect old /web/ to homepage - issue 1272 (issue 47860043)

Reviewers: Graham Percival, https://codereview.appspot.com/47860043/diff/1/Documentation/web/server/lilypond.org.htaccess File Documentation/web/server/lilypond.org.htaccess (right): https://codereview.appspot.com/47860043/diff/1/Documentation/web/server/lilypond.org.htaccess#newcode75 Document

Re: 3.0?

On 09/01/14 21:05, David Kastrup wrote: That must be the reason why the typical Word document features the consistent use of document styles for arriving at typographically superior results. I'm not sure that I feel happy about your benchmark for comparison. I think Lilypond's user base is a

Re: 3.0?

dak wrote > Joseph Rushton Wakeling < > joseph.wakeling@ > > writes: > >> On 09/01/14 12:20, David Kastrup wrote: >>> Another problem is that LilyPond has a usage philosophy and workflow >>> that strongly penalizes manual tweaks. Graphically/manually oriented >>> workflows detract from the impo

Re: 3.0?

Carl Peterson wrote > I use MuseScore, > Scorio, and Finale Notepad (depending on where I am and how I feel) > for compositional work because they provide ease of note entry in the > composing process and the ability to have instant aural feedback on > what I've written (particularly if I'm not at