Re: State of cherry-picking 2.20

[Jonas Hahnfeld]

Hi David,

Am Samstag, den 01.02.2020, 14:52 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup:
> I have mostly followed Jonas' proposals.  Rebasing his stable-2.20
> branch on the current state delivers the following rather small difference:
> 
> commit 26e346a54a4706d973cc5ad9eb2354364550a1d9 (HEAD)
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Wed Oct 9 12:35:10 2019 +0200
> 
>     granados.ly: Improved and updated.
>     
>     It fixes various glitches that crept in with newer lilypond versions; in
>     particular, it increases the size to be similar to the original edition.
>     
>     (cherry picked from commit 058c7347c1685cf5c100bac7eabd3b539aa4e6d6)
> 
> commit e5e5ea82772edf9f2af26047840aeaafb403a37e
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Tue Sep 24 13:05:38 2019 +0200
> 
>     stockhausen-klavierstueckII: Completely rewritten.
>     
>     It fixes various glitches that crept in with changes in current git; it 
> also
>     adds some improvements not present in earlier versions.
>     
>     Also use some macros to made the source code more readable.
>     
>     (cherry picked from commit a6f8381ea4fc4a493dab4b47c3cb1671e7fe7db2)
> 
> commit 50258957490e0b6a12b73983d30627d77587f48f
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Thu Sep 19 10:33:02 2019 +0200
> 
>     Rename `Stockhausen_Klavierstueck2' to `stockhausen-klavierstueckII'.
>     
>     (cherry picked from commit be39d353b72f7d61653d1168dc8958b28c2d47ca)
> 
> commit 128a3c79b7336c3faa2271fead6e8b056b04f0a9
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Wed Sep 18 12:03:40 2019 +0200
> 
>     bach-schenker.ly: Completely revised.
>     
>     In particular, the output now looks much more again like the original
>     version (but with additional improvements), see
>     
>       
> https://www.linuxjournal.com/article/8364
> 
>     
>     (cherry picked from commit 805e6ef94c5028f71dd112ab247f046383ae4bda)

I don't have a strong opinion on these, though I think it would be
great to have them after Werner did all the work to update the
examples. But as I don't understand what you write about lilypond-extra 
below, I can't really comment about the implications.

> commit e72bd333fe3b6b3092687111dbe84e2440a60c7d
> Author: James Lowe <address@hidden>
> Date:   Mon Apr 15 20:37:48 2019 +0100
> 
>     Doc: Usage - Better description of -dcrop in Usage chapter 1.2
>     
>     Issue 5286
>     Better description
>     of -dcrop in
>     Usage
>     chapter 1.2
> 
> commit cdfdbe886553f9988a83e37d89384816fa197940
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Sun Jan 20 09:23:10 2019 +0100
> 
>     running.itely: Minor fixes for command line option documentation.
> 
> commit 57dcab2161d26e964157863029c0087899ff55fa
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Sun Dec 23 13:51:22 2018 +0100
> 
>     Issue 5452: running.itely: Revise documentation of -d command line options
>     
>     . Formalize sub-options, giving the type of the second argument.
>     . Change from three-column table to normal table layout.
>     . Fix and improve option descriptions.
> 
> commit aea73ca362e73db4be672baf28727fb33dcf423c
> Author: Werner Lemberg <address@hidden>
> Date:   Sat Dec 22 16:09:48 2018 +0100
> 
>     Issue 5451: running.itely: Revise documentation of basic command line 
> options
> 
> 
> So what's up with all that?  I had serious conflicts with the command
> line option documentation.  However, they rebased nicely from Jonas'
> branch, making me suspect that he invested in a lot of editing.  I'd
> have to check that.

From https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/lilypond-devel/2019-11/msg00154.html:
---
I would propose to pick the following commits (in that order):
a6553e3cde Issue 5451: running.itely: Revise documentation of basic command 
line options
03f91e47a2 Issue 5452: running.itely: Revise documentation of -d command line 
options
f3f2b9d3d1 running.itely: Minor fixes for command line option documentation.
f4e30857e1 Doc: Usage - Better description of -dcrop in Usage chapter 1.2

(The first resulted in conflicts because the branch has c7c6c948c9
which was not in master...)
---

So yes, to resolve the conflicts for the first one I just ignored the
typo fixes from c7c6c948c9 (commit a6553e3cde rewrites that part
anyway). One option would be to simply revert commit c7c6c948c9, as
noted I couldn't find it in master. Afterwards the other commits should
apply cleanly.

Jonas


> I have not picked the updated examples since I think the images are
> actually contained in the lilypond-extra repository and not compiled
> inside of the LilyPond source itself.  Is that memory accurate?  If so,
> what is the proper way to proceed here?

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part