[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: 2.15.9 regtests

From: Mike Solomon
Subject: Re: 2.15.9 regtests
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 07:59:23 +0200

On Aug 31, 2011, at 7:52 AM, Graham Percival wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 31, 2011 at 03:08:04AM +0000, Keith OHara wrote:
>> I've looked closely at the changes with distance 5.0 or above, and 
>> looked quickly at the others.  If one more person takes a shift
>> starting at the small 'distances' that would be great.
> 5.0 and above?  ok, I'll do the rest.
>> One concern:  Cell counts doubled in many .profile reports !
> please add a new Critical issue for that.  We can always mark it
> invalid later.
>> Two unexpected spacing changes that I will investigate:  
> really? looks pretty much the same to me...?

> : lots of changes system spacing.  Mike,
> IIRC feathered beams were your baby; do you still like the look of
> this?  I don't see anything obviously wrong, but it seems quite
> suspicious overall.

This is a result (I think) of better height approximations.  Certainly doesn't 
bug me, although now that stem heights are more accurate, people may want to 
change how the effect vertical spacing in the weeks to come (i.e. investigate 
if a high stem should bear the same skyline consequences as a high notehead).  
Of course, all of this is under the assumption that my stem work is correct, 
but I believe that it's correct.


reply via email to

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