[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: retrograding with convert-ly
From: |
David Kastrup |
Subject: |
Re: retrograding with convert-ly |
Date: |
Sun, 15 Jul 2012 09:30:02 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
Colin Hall <address@hidden> writes:
> On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 05:52:09AM -0700, Eluze wrote:
>>
>> I just applied convert-ly to a file which contained \version
>> "2.15.41" - now the version is "2.15.40"!
>
> Thanks for the report, Eluze.
>
> Did you run the version of convert-ly released with Lilypond 2.15.41?
If it has upgraded to "2.15.40", it could not have been all that old.
> This sounds like a concrete bug to me. Is that also your opinion?
>
> Please confirm whether you expect a bug report to be created in
> response to this, or not.
Would need a concrete example/evidence, I think. Running current
convert-ly -ed on a file just containing the line
\version "2.15.41"
does not cause any change here. Neither does running it with a line
containing
\version "2.15.45"
(just to be sure to be in the future with respect to convert-ly).
--
David Kastrup
- retrograding with convert-ly, -Eluze, 2012/07/14
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, Colin Hall, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly,
David Kastrup <=
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, -Eluze, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, Colin Hall, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, David Kastrup, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, -Eluze, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, David Kastrup, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, Graham Percival, 2012/07/15
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, David Kastrup, 2012/07/16
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, -Eluze, 2012/07/16
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, David Kastrup, 2012/07/16
- Re: retrograding with convert-ly, -Eluze, 2012/07/17