bug-lilypond
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Reply to digest


From: Simon Albrecht
Subject: Reply to digest
Date: Mon, 4 Mar 2024 13:49:59 +0100

Hi Cameron,

please never reply to the digest form. The email will have incorrect headers, be displayed incorrectly in thread views, and mixing replies to different threads is wholly inconvenient as well. Bear in mind that this is sent to very many people who may or may not be interested in all topics on the list.

Best, Simon


On 03.03.24 19:11, Cameron Crowe via bug-lilypond wrote:
Thank you- good points, RE backups and copyrights.

Similar punishment!



Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

On Sunday, March 3rd, 2024 at 12:00 PM, bug-lilypond-request@gnu.org 
<bug-lilypond-request@gnu.org> wrote:

Send bug-lilypond mailing list submissions to
bug-lilypond@gnu.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
bug-lilypond-request@gnu.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
bug-lilypond-owner@gnu.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of bug-lilypond digest..."


Today's Topics:

1. (non-bug) lilypond-book & secondary source files (Cameron Crowe)
2. Re: (non-bug) lilypond-book & secondary source files
(David Kastrup)
3. copyright date (Cameron Crowe)
4. Re: copyright date (Ruud Harmsen)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 17:50:28 +0000
From: Cameron Crowe cameron.crowe@protonmail.com

To: "bug-lilypond@gnu.org" bug-lilypond@gnu.org

Subject: (non-bug) lilypond-book & secondary source files
Message-ID:
KdjNdh4gfHFebEWvNLLMS0ROWa9MuFHJvGlv9nj0nztVvZf2lnJ_4_jhuAYAmPccVwQ8LqbOWMrOlYYKqOj5MqWHNXGkFpu6Fega7o_Y3PM=@protonmail.com


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

Just a thought--not a bug.

lilypond-book refuses to overwrite a main source file, but happily overwrites 
secondary source files included into the main source file. Irritating if you 
use the .tex extension for included chapters of a musicological document and 
even just accidentally call lilypond-book without specifying a separate output 
dir.

"Don't do that." and "Version control!" would be perfectly good responses, and 
I probably have a few other minor (shrug-worth?) points if there is interest in hearing them.

In any case, I'm hugely fond of LP. Truly, thank you, devs and other 
contributors!

- Cam

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 19:04:33 +0100
From: David Kastrup dak@gnu.org

To: bug-lilypond@gnu.org
Subject: Re: (non-bug) lilypond-book & secondary source files
Message-ID: 87y1b05x3i.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org

Content-Type: text/plain

Cameron Crowe via bug-lilypond bug-lilypond@gnu.org writes:

Just a thought--not a bug.

lilypond-book refuses to overwrite a main source file, but happily
overwrites secondary source files included into the main source
file. Irritating if you use the .tex extension for included chapters
of a musicological document and even just accidentally call
lilypond-book without specifying a separate output dir.

"Don't do that." and "Version control!" would be perfectly good
responses,

Version control is not a substitute for backups.

and I probably have a few other minor (shrug-worth?) points if there
is interest in hearing them.

Just anecdotally: on MSDOS file systems, writing a file whatever.tex.aux
was equivalent to writing a file whatever.tex and when writing
\include{something} in a LaTeX file, this caused a file something.aux to
be created/written.

This made the punishment for writing \include{something.tex} instead of
the correct \include{something} pretty severe (until MikTeX was made to
detect this special case and refuse the operation).

--
David Kastrup



------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Sat, 02 Mar 2024 21:01:14 +0000
From: Cameron Crowe cameron.crowe@protonmail.com

To: "bug-lilypond@gnu.org" bug-lilypond@gnu.org

Subject: copyright date
Message-ID:
9ZBjOvJUSI-FNgj-nQJLy1aEQv_S3jtAXlUA4Ke5SrGbbnnCXmyR_XNlj_wf9JXlbR2LyiUUhl8UE44CRxXuSmWvhYTULXIjx8pxWPpmHFs=@protonmail.com


Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

I think the copyright is out of date for versions 2.24 and 2.25

GNU LilyPond 2.24.3 (running Guile 2.2)

Copyright (c) 1996--2023 by
Han-Wen Nienhuys hanwen@xs4all.nl

Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke@gnu.org

and others.

GNU LilyPond 2.25.13 (running Guile 3.0)

Copyright (c) 1996--2023 by
Han-Wen Nienhuys hanwen@xs4all.nl

Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke@gnu.org

and others.

------------------------------

Message: 4
Date: Sun, 03 Mar 2024 10:25:58 +0100
From: Ruud Harmsen ruudh@rudhar.com

To: bug-lilypond@gnu.org
Subject: Re: copyright date
Message-ID: 20240303092600.00BB9699AD@rudhar.com

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed

10:01 PM 3/2/2024, Cameron Crowe via bug-lilypond:

I think the copyright is out of date for versions 2.24 and 2.25
GNU LilyPond 2.24.3 (running Guile 2.2) Copyright (c) 1996--2023
by Han-Wen Nienhuys hanwen@xs4all.nl Jan Nieuwenhuizen
janneke@gnu.org and others. GNU LilyPond 2.25.13 (running
Guile 3.0) Copyright (c) 1996--2023 by Han-Wen Nienhuys
hanwen@xs4all.nl Jan Nieuwenhuizen janneke@gnu.org and others.

By the way, dating a copyright to make it valid was only required
by US law, not elsewhere, and even in the US that requirement was
abolished in I think it was 1970. Nowadays the copyright exists
even without any copyright notice, dated or not. What is required
is a maker, and creative content.

--
Ruud Harmsen, https://rudhar.com




------------------------------

Subject: Digest Footer

_______________________________________________
bug-lilypond mailing list
bug-lilypond@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond


------------------------------

End of bug-lilypond Digest, Vol 256, Issue 3
********************************************




reply via email to

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