Re: Let Merge_rests_engraver deal with dotted rests (issue 324310043 by address@hidden)

[thomasmorley65]

On 2017/08/29 07:55:06, dak wrote:

https://codereview.appspot.com/324310043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/simultaneous.itely
> File Documentation/notation/simultaneous.itely (right):


https://codereview.appspot.com/324310043/diff/40001/Documentation/notation/simultaneous.itely#newcode10
> Documentation/notation/simultaneous.itely:10: @c \version "2.19.29"
> On 2017/08/29 07:39:45, thomasmorley651 wrote:
> > On 2017/08/29 07:31:20, dak wrote:
> > > Version warrants changing to the version where the engraver got
register.
> At
> > > least once you actually make use of the registration...
> >
> > Not sure to which version I should change it, 2.21.0?

> Excellent question, actually.  I think that the dot merge
functionality is too
> new and untested for 2.20.0 but the Merge_rest_engraver itself has
been around
> unregistered for months and that seems like a bad idea for 2.20.  So
I'd propose
> that you split the registration (and its use in docs and old(!)
regtest) into a
> separate commit and use version 2.20.0 on that.  I can cherry-pick
that into the
> stable branch then.

> The rest is for 2.21 then.  It's either that or back out (namely
revert) all of
> the Merge_rest_engraver for 2.20.  But that would necessitate
tampering with
> both documentation and translation a lot more, so it's not my
preferred option.

> Holler if you need Git assistance.

I now splitted the patch.
Obviously Rietveld merges the two patches for review, though.
Is it possible to see them separated somewhere?

https://codereview.appspot.com/324310043/