Re: Footnotes correctly printed on grobs at first timestep. (issue 6306064)

[dak]

On 2012/06/10 16:22:25, MikeSol wrote:

> It's worth mentioning in the change log and perhaps a convert-ly
NOT_SMART rule.

The change log describes changes relative to the last stable release.  A
release which did not even have footnotes.  If we wanted to put
something in the change log, mentioning the existence of footnotes in
the first place would be a good candidate.

I am not sure that the level of the footnote engraver is not something
so fuzzy that it makes little sense to even devise convert-ly rules.  At
best, one could try changing overrides for Staff.FootnoteItem
appropriately in files that don't tamper with Footnote_engraver, but
that's all very hickety-wobbledy.

http://codereview.appspot.com/6306064/