2009/6/11 Graham Percival :
> Here's an introduction to the issue:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2009-04/msg00349.html
Ah, cheers. I missed that discussion.
Regards,
Neil
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http
On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:35:37PM +0100, Neil Puttock wrote:
> 2009/6/9 Graham Percival :
> > Thanks! Trevor worked on the beaming rules recently, and I think
> > that was one of the fixes. I've removed it from LSR.
>
> All those poor users who haven't upgraded to 2.13 will be wondering
> where
2009/6/9 Graham Percival :
> Thanks! Trevor worked on the beaming rules recently, and I think
> that was one of the fixes. I've removed it from LSR.
All those poor users who haven't upgraded to 2.13 will be wondering
where it's gone. :) I've reinstated it and removed the `docs' tag.
TBH, I'm n
Thanks! Trevor worked on the beaming rules recently, and I think
that was one of the fixes. I've removed it from LSR.
Cheers,
- Graham
On Tue, Jun 09, 2009 at 09:58:52PM +1000, Nick Payne wrote:
> The snippet "Automatic beams two per two in 4/4 or 2/2 time signature"
> (http://lilypond.org/doc/
The snippet "Automatic beams two per two in 4/4 or 2/2 time signature"
(http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.13/input/lsr/lilypond-snippets/Rhythms#Automatic
-beams-two-per-two-in-4_002f4-or-2_002f2-time-signature) seems to be
unneeded in 2.13.1, as the output in the snippet is the same with or without
the b
