Web: Review GSoC page introduction

Web: Review GSoC page introduction

[git, 2017-01-23 19:17:20]

Add a "general recommendations" section

[git, 2017-01-30 14:20:55]

Fixing embarrassing syntax errors (hopefully)

[dak, 2017-01-30 15:08:46]

https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:952: @subheading Adopt the SMuFL music font
encoding standard
Uh, that's not exactly what I would call "fixing embarrassing syntax errors". 
It is a complete new paragraph.

Though it's not clear to me how this diff comes about: this appears to be
already in LilyPond proper anyway.

[git, 2017-01-30 16:17:02]

https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):

https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
Documentation/web/community.itexi:952: @subheading Adopt the SMuFL music font
encoding standard
On 2017/01/30 15:08:45, dak wrote:
> Uh, that's not exactly what I would call "fixing embarrassing syntax errors". 
> It is a complete new paragraph.
> 
> Though it's not clear to me how this diff comes about: this appears to be
> already in LilyPond proper anyway.

I'm not sure what you're concretely referring to here.
In the line the link pointed to (comparing base to patch set 3 There isn't
anything in the diff.

You will see that SMuFL project paragraph as new when you compare Patch set 2
with patch set 3. This is due to the fact that patch set 2 was uploaded before I
could push #5037.

Before uploading patch set 3 I rebased my branch on master to make sure that a)
it still merges and b) that what's in the patch set is what will eventually be
applied to master. Should I *not* do that and keep my branch untouched until the
last moment (i.e. before pushing)? But what happens when master moves further in
the meantime? This is not unlikely, since I'm going to have a number of patches
about the projects on this page.

Of course I can see now that you don't have a reference to what the current
patch set is actually doing, OK, that's not very nice.
But you can probably ignore that one in this case if the patch passes make doc.
Then you can just read it as-is.

[dak, 2017-01-30 16:21:29]

git@ursliska.de writes:

>
https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
> File Documentation/web/community.itexi (right):
>
>
https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/diff/40001/Documentation/web/communi...
> Documentation/web/community.itexi:952: @subheading Adopt the SMuFL music
> font encoding standard
> On 2017/01/30 15:08:45, dak wrote:
>> Uh, that's not exactly what I would call "fixing embarrassing syntax
> errors".
>> It is a complete new paragraph.
>
>> Though it's not clear to me how this diff comes about: this appears to
> be
>> already in LilyPond proper anyway.
>
> I'm not sure what you're concretely referring to here.
> In the line the link pointed to (comparing base to patch set 3 There
> isn't anything in the diff.
>
> You will see that SMuFL project paragraph as new when you compare Patch
> set 2 with patch set 3.

Which is what I did.

> This is due to the fact that patch set 2 was uploaded before I could
> push #5037.

Ok.

> https://codereview.appspot.com/315410043/

-- 
David Kastrup