Reviewers: ,
Message:
Please review.
Description:
text-replacements: add ä and the like
Provides aliases auml,Auml,ouml,Ouml,uuml,Uuml
They were wanted by a user, so why not provide them?
I take it that the list in NR A.13 is auto-generated?
Please review this at https://codereview.appspot.com
On 2016/01/16 18:08:08, ht wrote:
Hi,
This patch introduces an interface for adjusting the values of all
MIDI
controllers responding to Control Change events from within LilyPond
input
using context properties. Instead of adding a new context property
for
every controller, however, this
Hello,
Here is the current patch countdown list. The next countdown will be on
January the 24th.
A quick synopsis of all patches currently in the review process can be
found here:
http://philholmes.net/lilypond/allura/
__
Push: No patches to Push at this time.
Countdown:
4747 Remo
Starting the next round somewhat earlier ...
Surprisingly there also will be a Google Summer of Code 2016, and I
think we should be better prepared this time and not miss a slot due to
lack of students.
Mentoring organizations apply between 8-19 February, students 14-25 March.
IIRC in our case th
Hello Paul
On 19/01/16 21:57, Paul Morris wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> I thought your CG edits in issue 4666 were a really helpful improvement:
> https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/4666/
Thanks,
>
> Did you intend to keep this git-cl info (install and configuration) in
> the 3.3.4 Commits a
> text-replacements: add ä and the like
> Provides aliases auml,Auml,ouml,Ouml,uuml,Uuml
> They were wanted by a user, so why not provide them?
I don’t want my observation to hold back this change if everyone else likes it,
but this looks like a slippery slope.
_
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 11:02 AM, Urs Liska wrote:
>
> But I think *now* is the time to start thinking about possible projects
> for this instead of waiting for some students to show up out of the blue.
>
> What would be a suitable approach?
>
> * Thinking about a number of tasks that
>- wou
> On Jan 21, 2016, at 12:03 PM, James wrote:
>
> This checkin was a very large edit, and I in these cases I am careful
> (hopefully) to *not* remove information from other sections at least at
> first, but mainly because my intention was to try to consolidate some of
> these subsections togeth
