lilypond.org Productions page

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
21 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2
Hello

I was about to send a patch to add a website in the Productions page
(sheets are CC licensed, subscription required):
https://www.baroquemusic.it/

Then I realized that 3 out of 4 projects listed under "Published sheet
music" section are discontinued.
Should we just delete them?
http://lilypond.org/website/productions.html

Which are the requirements (if any) to be listed on that page? Should
we link only projects following Free Software principles?

If you know of any other project which may be listed there please let
me know.

Thanks
Federico




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Urs Liska-3
Hi Federico,

Am 03.12.18 um 08:53 schrieb Federico Bruni:

> Hello
>
> I was about to send a patch to add a website in the Productions page
> (sheets are CC licensed, subscription required):
> https://www.baroquemusic.it/
>
> Then I realized that 3 out of 4 projects listed under "Published sheet
> music" section are discontinued.
> Should we just delete them?
> http://lilypond.org/website/productions.html


You're right, this is quite embarrassing. However, if we remove
everything but Mutopia, it will look even more embarrassing, isn't it? I
have problems with such pages (applies equally to "News" pages) that
reveal more a *lack* of content and activity.

I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users (but
this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a number of
new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.

> Which are the requirements (if any) to be listed on that page? Should
> we link only projects following Free Software principles?


Yes. When Janek and I wanted to use the award for our Oskar Fried
edition to put some spotlight on LilyPond we could not get it added to
this page. All we could get agreement to was adding a News item about
the fact that we used a crowdfunding campain trying to make it possible
to open source the edition.


>
>
> If you know of any other project which may be listed there please let
> me know.
>

I will have two projects, but it will need a number of months before
they are ready and (in one case) can be publicly disclosed.

Best
Urs


> Thanks
> Federico
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Henning Hraban Ramm-3
Am 2018-12-03 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska <[hidden email]>:

> I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.

My only publicly available LilyPond work is http://www.vorwaertsbuchverlag.de/buecher/das-vorwärts-liederbuch
LilyPond isn’t mentioned, and the layout is not by me.


Greetlings, Hraban
---
fiëé visuëlle
Henning Hraban Ramm
https://www.fiee.net





_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Sandro Santilli-2
On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0100, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
> Am 2018-12-03 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska <[hidden email]>:
>
> > I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.
>
> My only publicly available LilyPond work is http://www.vorwaertsbuchverlag.de/buecher/das-vorwärts-liederbuch
> LilyPond isn’t mentioned, and the layout is not by me.

I've some lilypond files in https://strk.kbt.io/poetry/music

--strk;

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Jan-Peter Voigt
In reply to this post by Urs Liska-3
Hi there,

2017/2018 Ortus published the "Markus Passion" by Johann Sebastian Bach
in a reconstructed version by Andreas Fischer:
http://www.ortus-musikverlag.de/en/musik-elbe-oder/om212
(right now the introduction is only available in german, sorry)

LilyPond is not mentioned there, but I created the scores (full-score,
piano-reduction, vocal-score, instrument-parts) with the Gonville font,
using the edition-engraver and with my own templating engine.
If there would be some time I would write an article for
http://lilypondblog.org/ ...

Jan-Peter




Am 03.12.18 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska:

> Hi Federico,
>
> Am 03.12.18 um 08:53 schrieb Federico Bruni:
>> Hello
>>
>> I was about to send a patch to add a website in the Productions page
>> (sheets are CC licensed, subscription required):
>> https://www.baroquemusic.it/
>>
>> Then I realized that 3 out of 4 projects listed under "Published sheet
>> music" section are discontinued.
>> Should we just delete them?
>> http://lilypond.org/website/productions.html
>
>
> You're right, this is quite embarrassing. However, if we remove
> everything but Mutopia, it will look even more embarrassing, isn't it? I
> have problems with such pages (applies equally to "News" pages) that
> reveal more a *lack* of content and activity.
>
> I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users (but
> this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a number of
> new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.
>
>> Which are the requirements (if any) to be listed on that page? Should
>> we link only projects following Free Software principles?
>
>
> Yes. When Janek and I wanted to use the award for our Oskar Fried
> edition to put some spotlight on LilyPond we could not get it added to
> this page. All we could get agreement to was adding a News item about
> the fact that we used a crowdfunding campain trying to make it possible
> to open source the edition.
>
>
>>
>>
>> If you know of any other project which may be listed there please let
>> me know.
>>
>
> I will have two projects, but it will need a number of months before
> they are ready and (in one case) can be publicly disclosed.
>
> Best
> Urs
>
>
>> Thanks
>> Federico

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Engraver


>> I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users (but
>> this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a number of
>> new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.
A mention of my website would be nice: http://partitura.org
I use Lilypond and Frescobaldi to create new score of organ music from
manuscript sources. Lilypond and Frescobalde are both mentioned, so it
could be a nice showcase.

Regards,
Auke







_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2
In reply to this post by Sandro Santilli-2


Il giorno mer 5 dic 2018 alle 16:32, Sandro Santilli <[hidden email]> ha
scritto:

> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0100, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
>>  Am 2018-12-03 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>  > I think we should rather try to do a general collection among
>> users (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to
>> get a number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more
>> impressive.
>>
>>  My only publicly available LilyPond work is
>> http://www.vorwaertsbuchverlag.de/buecher/das-vorwärts-liederbuch
>>  LilyPond isn’t mentioned, and the layout is not by me.
>
> I've some lilypond files in https://strk.kbt.io/poetry/music
>
>

Thanks, but I see copyrighted music.
I think we should link only to public domain or open content licensed
music.




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2
In reply to this post by Engraver


Il giorno sab 8 dic 2018 alle 8:55, Partitura Organum
<[hidden email]> ha scritto:

>
>
>>> I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users
>>> (but
>>> this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a
>>> number of
>>> new entries for the page that makes it a little more impressive.
> A mention of my website would be nice: http://partitura.org
> I use Lilypond and Frescobaldi to create new score of organ music
> from manuscript sources. Lilypond and Frescobalde are both mentioned,
> so it could be a nice showcase.
>

This is perfect, I'll add it to the patch I'm working on.
Thanks




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2
In reply to this post by Urs Liska-3


Il giorno lun 3 dic 2018 alle 9:22, Urs Liska <[hidden email]>
ha scritto:

> Hi Federico,
>
> Am 03.12.18 um 08:53 schrieb Federico Bruni:
>> Hello
>>
>> I was about to send a patch to add a website in the Productions page
>> (sheets are CC licensed, subscription required):
>> https://www.baroquemusic.it/
>>
>> Then I realized that 3 out of 4 projects listed under "Published
>> sheet music" section are discontinued.
>> Should we just delete them?
>> http://lilypond.org/website/productions.html
>
>
> You're right, this is quite embarrassing. However, if we remove
> everything but Mutopia, it will look even more embarrassing, isn't
> it? I have problems with such pages (applies equally to "News" pages)
> that reveal more a *lack* of content and activity.
>
> I think we should rather try to do a general collection among users
> (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to get a
> number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more
> impressive.
>


I prefer a small list of active projects than a larger list of mostly
abandoned ones.
We should also point out that the list is limited to a) projects using
LilyPond exclusively (otherwise we might mention also IMSLP) b) works
publicly available and distributed as either public domain or open
content works. This would explain the small list.



>
>>
>>
>> If you know of any other project which may be listed there please
>> let me know.
>>
>
> I will have two projects, but it will need a number of months before
> they are ready and (in one case) can be publicly disclosed.
>

This can be added later.





_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2


Il giorno sab 8 dic 2018 alle 10:35, Federico Bruni
<[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> I prefer a small list of active projects than a larger list of mostly
> abandoned ones.
> We should also point out that the list is limited to a) projects
> using LilyPond exclusively (otherwise we might mention also IMSLP) b)
> works publicly available and distributed as either public domain or
> open content works. This would explain the small list.
>

I've just uploaded a patch:
https://codereview.appspot.com/348040043/

Please comment on Rietveld if you have any suggestion.

Thanks
Federico




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Ralph Palmer
In reply to this post by Federico Bruni-2
I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.

All the best,

Ralph

On Sat, Dec 8, 2018 at 4:27 AM Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> wrote:


Il giorno mer 5 dic 2018 alle 16:32, Sandro Santilli <[hidden email]> ha
scritto:
> On Mon, Dec 03, 2018 at 11:12:31AM +0100, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
>>  Am 2018-12-03 um 09:22 schrieb Urs Liska <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>  > I think we should rather try to do a general collection among
>> users (but this should reach more channels than just this list) to
>> get a number of new entries for the page that makes it a little more
>> impressive.
>>
>>  My only publicly available LilyPond work is
>> http://www.vorwaertsbuchverlag.de/buecher/das-vorwärts-liederbuch
>>  LilyPond isn’t mentioned, and the layout is not by me.
>
> I've some lilypond files in https://strk.kbt.io/poetry/music
>
>

Thanks, but I see copyrighted music.
I think we should link only to public domain or open content licensed
music.




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


--
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Carl Sorensen-3

 

 

From: Ralph Palmer <[hidden email]>
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
To: <[hidden email]>
Cc: <[hidden email]>, lilypond-user Mailinglist <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

 

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.

 

 

I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let it be listed on our productions page.

 

Thanks,

 

Carl

 


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Urs Liska-3


Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:

 

 

From: Ralph Palmer [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email], lilypond-user Mailinglist [hidden email]
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

 

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.

 

 

I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let it be listed on our productions page.


I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a GNU project" etc. etc.


 

Thanks,

 

Carl

 


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

David Kastrup
Urs Liska <[hidden email]> writes:

> Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
>>
>> *From: *Ralph Palmer <[hidden email]>
>> *Date: *Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
>> *To: *<[hidden email]>
>> *Cc: *<[hidden email]>, lilypond-user Mailinglist <[hidden email]>
>> *Subject: *Re: lilypond.org Productions page
>>
>> I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes
>> transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but
>> I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the
>> collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced
>> using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the
>> introductory materials in another program and post the whole
>> production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with
>> copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted
>> materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful
>> to other violists.
>>
>> I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain
>> and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the
>> music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we
>> should let it be listed on our productions page.
>>
>
> I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a
> GNU project" etc. etc.

The question is just what conditions we are talking about here regarding
further distribution.  The GFDL is not a public license either.  And
with regard to the FSF, Stallman is actually not all that much
interested in matters outside of software and its documentation.

So it's likely more a matter of what we want to see/promote.  A fuzzy "I
can publish on the Internet" without clear idea about what people may
actually do when tripping on this "on the Internet" is actually not
unlikely to lead us into trouble.  "I can publish" and "the LilyPond
project may publish" are different things.  If it's not clear what
people may actually do with it, a subset (marked or even available
separately) with more clearcut conditions may actually be more useful to
some subset of users.

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Ralph Palmer


On Sun, Dec 9, 2018 at 12:34 PM David Kastrup <[hidden email]> wrote:
Urs Liska <[hidden email]> writes:

> Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:
>>
>> *From: *Ralph Palmer <[hidden email]>
>> *Date: *Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
>> *To: *<[hidden email]>
>> *Cc: *<[hidden email]>, lilypond-user Mailinglist <[hidden email]>
>> *Subject: *Re: lilypond.org Productions page
>>
>> I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes
>> transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but
>> I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the
>> collection publicly on the internet.
>>
>> I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain
>> and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the
>> music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we
>> should let it be listed on our productions page.
>>
>
> I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a
> GNU project" etc. etc.

The question is just what conditions we are talking about here regarding
further distribution.  The GFDL is not a public license either.  And
with regard to the FSF, Stallman is actually not all that much
interested in matters outside of software and its documentation.

So it's likely more a matter of what we want to see/promote.  A fuzzy "I
can publish on the Internet" without clear idea about what people may
actually do when tripping on this "on the Internet" is actually not
unlikely to lead us into trouble.  "I can publish" and "the LilyPond
project may publish" are different things.  If it's not clear what
people may actually do with it, a subset (marked or even available
separately) with more clearcut conditions may actually be more useful to
some subset of users.

--
David Kastrup

Thanks for the clarification, David.

Ralph

--
Ralph Palmer
Brattleboro, VT
USA
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

lilypond.org Productions page

MARC LANOISELEE
In reply to this post by David Kastrup

You can report publishers on imslp, for example

https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Garvin,_Allen

1164 editions with Lilypond engraving files

Marc Lanoiselée


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Carl Sorensen-3
In reply to this post by Urs Liska-3

 

 

From: Urs Liska <[hidden email]>
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 10:15 AM
To: <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

 

 

Am 09.12.18 um 17:54 schrieb Carl Sorensen:

 

 

From: Ralph Palmer [hidden email]
Date: Sunday, December 9, 2018 at 5:41 AM
To: [hidden email]
Cc: [hidden email], lilypond-user Mailinglist [hidden email]
Subject: Re: lilypond.org Productions page

 

I'm currently working on a collection of fiddle tunes transcribed/transposed for viola. It includes copyrighted music, but I have explicit permission from the copyright holders to post the collection publicly on the internet. The collection is produced using LilyPond and Frescobaldi, although I was planning to do the introductory materials in another program and post the whole production as PDF. Would my collection be acceptable with copyrighted (copywritten?) materials? I could remove the copyrighted materials, but that would certainly make the collection less useful to other violists.

 

 

I would prefer that we not limit the productions to public domain and open content licensed material.  In my opinion, as long as the music is available to see on the web (preferably in pdf form), we should let it be listed on our productions page.

 

I'm afraid this isn't a matter of personal opinion, because "we're a GNU project" etc. etc.

I haven’t seen anything about GNU software that tries to restrict freedom of use.  In fact, one of the key issues of GNU software is exactly freedom of use.  The GNU licenses don’t say that any code compiled with gcc must have a GPL license.  They only say that any modifications to *the GPL software* must have a GPL license.

As far as I can see, as long as the copyright holder for the music has given the permission for the music to be published on the internet, it’s perfectly fine for LilyPond, as a GNU project, to link to the location where the music is published.

Thanks,

Carl


_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

David Kastrup
Carl Sorensen <[hidden email]> writes:

> I haven’t seen anything about GNU software that tries to restrict
> freedom of use.  In fact, one of the key issues of GNU software is
> exactly freedom of use.  The GNU licenses don’t say that any code
> compiled with gcc must have a GPL license.  They only say that any
> modifications to *the GPL software* must have a GPL license.

The pertinent rules are the GNU maintainer guidelines.

<https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration>

> As far as I can see, as long as the copyright holder for the music has
> given the permission for the music to be published on the internet,
> it’s perfectly fine for LilyPond, as a GNU project, to link to the
> location where the music is published.

The passage in question is:

    A GNU package should not recommend use of any non-free program, nor
    should it require a non-free program (such as a non-free compiler or
    IDE) to build. Thus, a GNU package cannot be written in a
    programming language that does not have a free software
    implementation. Now that GNU/Linux systems are widely available, all
    GNU packages should provide full functionality on a 100% free
    GNU/Linux system, and should not require any non-free software to
    build or function. The GNU Coding Standards say a lot more about
    this issue.

    Similarly, a GNU package should not require the use of non-free
    software, including JavaScript, for the coordination of its
    development. For example, please don’t use Transifex for translation
    of your software because it requires your translators to use
    non-free, JavaScript-based editing tools. Instead, a service without
    any ethical concerns should be used, such as The Translation Project
    (https://translationproject.org).

    A GNU package should not refer the user to any non-free
    documentation for free software. The need for free documentation to
    come with free software is now a major focus of the GNU project; to
    show that we are serious about the need for free documentation, we
    must not contradict our position by recommending use of
    documentation that isn’t free.

As you can clearly see, that the GNU licenses don't restrict freedom of
use (though they restrict non-freedom of use) and that GCC can be used
for compiling non-free software does not mean that referring to non-free
software in documentation (and web sites) is desired.

So your argument does not match what the guidelines clearly state.
However, as I stated the main concern of the FSF and of GNU's official
stance stops with software and its documentation.  Where we want ours to
stop with regard to musical scores is basically not proscribed.

My personal opinion is that if we have the ability to point people to
scores with clearly defined permissions of use, that's a preferable
value proposition to more comprehensive collections people may or may
not be using legally for some purpose.

--
David Kastrup

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Federico Bruni-2
In reply to this post by MARC LANOISELEE


Il giorno dom 9 dic 2018 alle 22:50, "marc.lanoiselee"
<[hidden email]> ha scritto:

>
> You can report publishers on imslp, for example
>
> https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Garvin,_Allen
>
> 1164 editions with Lilypond engraving files
>
> Marc Lanoiselée
>
>

Interesting... but there's no LilyPond category on IMSLP, right? That
would be very useful...


I've just remembered another one, Paul Morris' Clairnote sheets:
https://clairnote.org/sheet-music/




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: lilypond.org Productions page

Schneidy
Hi Federico,

Le lun. 10 déc. 2018 à 23:08, Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> Interesting... but there's no LilyPond category on IMSLP, right? That
> would be very useful...

No there isn't, but a Mutopia one exists:

Cheers,
Pierre

Le lun. 10 déc. 2018 à 23:08, Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> a écrit :


Il giorno dom 9 dic 2018 alle 22:50, "marc.lanoiselee"
<[hidden email]> ha scritto:
>
> You can report publishers on imslp, for example
>
> https://imslp.org/wiki/Category:Garvin,_Allen
>
> 1164 editions with Lilypond engraving files
>
> Marc Lanoiselée
>
>

Interesting... but there's no LilyPond category on IMSLP, right? That
would be very useful...


I've just remembered another one, Paul Morris' Clairnote sheets:
https://clairnote.org/sheet-music/




_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
[hidden email]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
12