Re: Please document new part-combine features

[Graham Percival]

On Sun, Feb 06, 2011 at 12:00:04AM +0100, Xavier Scheuer wrote:
> OK, but there is still a problem in current "policy", isn't it?

I don't see any problem.

> I mean, without this request on LilyPond French Users mailing list,
> what would have happened ?

We'd do it when hen we tackled issue 1217, the **only**
High-priority doc issue:
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1217

> Reinhold implemented these new features more than 4 months ago, without
> documenting them in the [notation] manual (as current policy).

We have undocumented features from longer than 4 months ago.  If
you're interested in this, then start looking for them and writing
docs.  This is a Frog task, after all.

If you want better documentation, then start writing
documentation.

> Should I have a look at Reinhold's PATCH 1698054, try to understand
> the new commands in order to do this "mundane doc task"?

The first place to look would be any regression tests that were
added for this.  Then create 1-3 short lilypond input files which
demonstrate the feature.

Once you've done that, we can talk about the next step.

> Or should I wait because this new patch for "keeping state in
> part_combine_engraver" may induce some changes in the way
> part-combination decision will be done?

Dunno about that.

- Graham