Menu
▾
▴
#2916 Doc : NR Document \hide command
Originally created by: *anonymous
Originally created by: pkx1...@gmail.com
Originally owned by: dak@gnu.org
References:
Message thread
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2012-09/msg00555.html
Rietveld issue
Related
Discussion
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
I think this is issue 2870, and the referenced message thread is about an outdated proposal where there were still both \hide and \hidden proposed. Documenting \hide should likely take the effects of issue 2883 into account which will allow also writing \hide Staff.TimeSignature when needed.
The same part of the change allowing for this syntax, however, will also require changing \footnote and \tweak syntax (as they can't use optional symbols before strings any more or vice versa). Because of the change of footnote syntax will only leave compilable documentation if the German translation has been merged, this depends on the post-2.16.1 translation branch merge into master.
Huh. I'd try breaking this increasingly awkward dependency chain by cherry-picking the German translations into staging ahead of time, but the required convert-ly run would likely complicate the merge. Unless one runs convert-ly on the translation branch before merging. But then both merge parents will be different from the common ancestor, and so there will be no automatic merge conflict resolution.
It is really probably best if we can get the translation branch moved to 2.17 soon.
Cc: fedel...@gmail.com
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit
Also fixes a few other inaccuracies.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102
Labels: Patch-new
Owner: dak@gnu.org
Status: Started
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Patchy the autobot says: passes tests. But it's a doc-only change, so regtesting is not all that conclusive.
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-review
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Can't omit matching context name in context modification
http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102
Labels: -Patch-review Patch-new
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Patchy the autobot says: Patch does not apply to master.
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-needs_work
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
"Does not apply to master" makes precious little sense as master is straight in its history. I'll need to recheck this anyway, but it would appear that Trevor's Rietveld criticism would best be addressed by issue 2982 first, afterwards reverting to the first version of the Rietveld patch.
Blockedon: lilypond:2982
Labels: -Patch-needs_work Patch-waiting
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Revert directed \hide/\omit. Depends on issue 2982 for correct docs, but will compile anyway.
http://codereview.appspot.com/6851102
Labels: -Patch-waiting Patch-new
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Patchy the autobot says: passes tests. Can be on countdown with issue 2982 but should be committed afterwards to avoid inaccurate documentation.
Labels: -Patch-new Patch-review
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Labels: -Patch-review Patch-countdown
Originally posted by: ColinPKC...@gmail.com
Counted down to 20121203, please push after #2982
Labels: -Patch-countdown Patch-push
Originally posted by: dak@gnu.org
Pushed to staging as
commit [r6d501730d319a6456acd13870821f0bcad64bf4e]
Author: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Date: Sun Nov 25 19:30:12 2012 +0100
Issue 2916: Document \hide and \omit
Also fixes a few other inaccuracies.
Blockedon: -lilypond:2982
Labels: -Patch-push Fixed_2_17_9
Status: Fixed
Originally posted by: Elu...@gmail.com
(No comment was entered for this change.)
Status: Verified