| Re: [frogs] Re: patch for bug 729 |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lilynet.net/frogs Archives
]
- To: "Carl D. Sorensen" <c_sorensen@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [frogs] Re: patch for bug 729
- From: Graham Percival <graham@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2009 15:56:34 +0800
- Cc: "frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <frogs@xxxxxxxxxxx>, lilypond-devel <lilypond-devel@xxxxxxx>, Mats Bengtsson <mats.bengtsson@xxxxxxxxx>
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:sender:date:from:to:cc :subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=ptLbs8l6Do+BEIFTF+dIc+yJ6apOGiOkjD1qPimvQEg=; b=mmlmDKZBQ143g7q72O25qdE51B6iHiXR4pApEk/Mg5YAfQTLOwNBvpBNRnPFxzttDt rio08t64ZW+h26ChVbNe/7rn6Gu5F+fywz7ds1sN3OOSe/0Gc4foTIzkSqMfacfnTOtL pVmxpK5nzh8XCaJl0WxeYnl0rsxXuvPbSOYLo=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=sender:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=LvWShj/pi3XUnWDPk+jasbxfuA+3g3MWTPLXD3L9EfRKHPcVYLeUMf9dEFOKRaB3nP Zxa3r0za3xgaVRavTY/S6lYPpt4pbWZczb5qxKpkyMJwEi9EAUGGFoKF68AephoQXn8u WqApL4UKD+9XBwxjYhIj1Qk5zTlfmT3PazEOg=
On Sat, Feb 28, 2009 at 05:41:21PM -0700, Carl D. Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 2/28/09 3:43 PM, "John Mandereau" <john.mandereau@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Hi Carl,
> > Carl D. Sorensen a écrit :
> >> So, just for the record, I guess that the appropriate way to handle this
> >> would be to:
> >>
> >> 1. Search through input/lsr for relevant files.
> >> 2. Fix the snippet to make sure it compiles properly.
> >> 3. Copy the snippet to input/new
> >> 4. Delete the snippet from input/lsr
> >>
> > Yes, except you shouldn't do 4, and don't forget some snippets
> > eventually come from LSR, not from input/new.
>
> We can't do anything about the snippets that come from LSR, can we? They're
> for the old release, so they can't be updated, IIUC.
>
> I thought that was why we had input/new, to handle snippets that had changed
> syntax from the currently-running LSR.
Yes. Files from input/new/ overwrite files from input/lsr/ (if
they have exactly the same filename, of course).
Cheers,
- Graham
---
----
Join the Frogs!