Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)

[ArnoldTheresius]

Phil Holmes-2 wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "ArnoldTheresius" <address@hidden>
> To: <address@hidden>
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 8:14 AM
> Subject: Re: Volta enhancements tranche 1 (issue 6398055)
> 
> 
>> Graham Percival-3 wrote:
>>>
>>> http://codereview.appspot.com/6398055/diff/1/Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely#newcode245
>>> Documentation/de/notation/repeats.itely:245: @cindex ndex \inStaffSegno
>>> what's an ndex?
> 
>>>
>> At the moment I cannot check, where this mistake happend.
>> The original line 254 "@cindex Wiederholungen mit Überbindung", now line
>> 264, should be kept intact.
> ...
> It was in the patch you provided on the web site.  I've corrected this and 
> applied the other comments and pushed the patch.  Tranche 2 next...
> 
> --
> Phil Holmes 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-devel mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
> 
> 

I checked my personal development history.
Originally I did the whole staff in one source tree. There I wrote
address@hidden \inStaffSegno«.
When I devided it into three smaller pathes I made the mistake.

Now the qestion:
I my original intent address@hidden \inStaffSegno« better than the 
address@hidden
\inStaffSegno« I mentioned in my last mail?

ArnoldTheresius
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://old.nabble.com/Volta-enhancements-tranche-1-%28issue-6398055%29-tp34175083p34203677.html
Sent from the Gnu - Lilypond - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.