bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: bug-lilypond Digest, Vol 95, Issue 11


From: Dmytro O. Redchuk
Subject: Re: bug-lilypond Digest, Vol 95, Issue 11
Date: Wed, 6 Oct 2010 09:36:18 +0300
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Wed 06 Oct 2010, 07:44 David Kastrup wrote:
> Carl Sorensen <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> > On 10/5/10 5:50 PM, "Keith E OHara" <address@hidden> wrote:
> >> 
> >> If \cadenzaOff turns autobeaming on, then what about scores that turn off
> >> autobeaming for the whole piece, but then (mis-)use short cadenzas?
> >
> > The CHANGES file informs the user that they will need to turn off
> > autobeaming manually after the cadenza, as does the notation reference.
> >
> > I think this is the right thing to do.
> 
> I think a revert would be more appropriate.
Please, why?..

ps.
I do believe that another issue may be pushed instead of reverting,
enhancement request -- how autobeaming should work in cadenzas. Or, may be,
enev another one --- it should be documented _how_ autobeaming works in
cadenzas _now_?  (before 1289).

But for the moment it seems to be quite correct -- to switch autobeaming off
and let user switch it on and specify beaming rules. I am not sure that i
understand what's i am talking about .) But 1289 looks reasonable.

Sorry for the noise.

-- 
  Dmytro O. Redchuk
  Bug Squad



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]