musescore lands sponsoring?

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

musescore lands sponsoring?

Jan Nieuwenhuizen

Just to make sure you have seen

    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0

Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
sponsoring project?  What are we missing?

Jan

--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl 

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Marc Weber
Excerpts from Jan Nieuwenhuizen's message of Tue May 29 09:56:14 +0200 2012:
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?

Just talking about my personal experience ..

I personally can only say that I've tried teaching lilypond to a
friendly woman and my mother - I failed both times (due to complexity).
It was too much for them to remember syntax and some templates for
repetitions and such.

Both were able to write scores with muscore. Of course they are no
professional type setters.

Musecore fails to render some specific cases when printing - but
exporting to lilypond seems to work in all (little) cases I tried.

Thus for simple cases I like that combination: musescore for typing and
lilypond for rendering.

Sponsorings are not always easy to understand :(

Marc Weber

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

mike@apollinemike.com
In reply to this post by Jan Nieuwenhuizen
On 29 mai 2012, at 09:56, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:

>
> Just to make sure you have seen
>
>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>
> Jan
>

We're missing consensus.  I think that if there were a SponsorshipMeister, not unlike the BugMeister, we could do really cool stuff like this.  Besides the monetary aid, this brings huge recognition to the community and gets a lot of people on board.

LoMuS is already a great step in this direction - it took me 1 hour max to fill out and send the application and as a result we'll have better skylines at the end of the summer.  We already have a great piece of software that speaks for itself - we just need someone (or a group of people) dedicated to contacting people and seeking out collaborations.  But before that, as I said above, we need consensus, and I know that there are a few people who don't want to see LilyPond go in this direction.

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

David Kastrup
"[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> writes:

> On 29 mai 2012, at 09:56, Jan Nieuwenhuizen wrote:
>
>>
>> Just to make sure you have seen
>>
>>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>>
>> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
>> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>>
>> Jan
>>
>
> We're missing consensus.  I think that if there were a
> SponsorshipMeister, not unlike the BugMeister, we could do really cool
> stuff like this.  Besides the monetary aid, this brings huge
> recognition to the community and gets a lot of people on board.

I don't agree: the money aspect is not really where we want to go since
what it _can_ achieve is much less than what already _works_ with
LilyPond.

> LoMuS is already a great step in this direction - it took me 1 hour
> max to fill out and send the application and as a result we'll have
> better skylines at the end of the summer.

That glosses over the fact that the money does not turn out skylines,
but rather Mike does.  And getting Mike to the state where he will crank
out skylines took a lot of dedication and time, something quite
impossible to pay for with tiny sums like that of LoMuS.  And I have a
hunch that it will take again a lot of dedication and time from others
before the skylines are actually production quality.

A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
turn money into LilyPond.  The truth is that we can turn enthusiasm into
LilyPond.

> We already have a great piece of software that speaks for itself - we
> just need someone (or a group of people) dedicated to contacting
> people and seeking out collaborations.  But before that, as I said
> above, we need consensus, and I know that there are a few people who
> don't want to see LilyPond go in this direction.

We don't make the best of our potential for selling LilyPond out.  But
we should not run into trap of making money a metric for the success of
LilyPond or its contributors.

--
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: musescore lands sponsoring?

Nils Hammerfest
On Tue, 29 May 2012 11:15:08 +0200
David Kastrup <[hidden email]> wrote:

> A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
> turn money into LilyPond.  The truth is that we can turn enthusiasm into
> LilyPond.

Money does prevent enthusiasm from working at a gas station.

Nil

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Jan Nieuwenhuizen
In reply to this post by David Kastrup
David Kastrup writes:

>> We're missing consensus.  I think that if there were a
>> SponsorshipMeister, not unlike the BugMeister, we could do really cool
>> stuff like this.  Besides the monetary aid, this brings huge
>> recognition to the community and gets a lot of people on board.

> A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
> turn money into LilyPond.  The truth is that we can turn enthusiasm into
> LilyPond.

How to turn enthousiasm into LilyPond, if people are unaware of it's
existence.  Long before we go SponsorshipMeister, I would suggest a
PRMeister.

> We don't make the best of our potential for selling LilyPond out.  But
> we should not run into trap of making money a metric for the success of
> LilyPond or its contributors.

So what would be a valid metric for LilyPond's success?  Can we
determine where the hanging fruit is that we are missing in selling
LilyPond out?

Jan

--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl 

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

David Kastrup
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> writes:

> David Kastrup writes:
>
>>> We're missing consensus.  I think that if there were a
>>> SponsorshipMeister, not unlike the BugMeister, we could do really cool
>>> stuff like this.  Besides the monetary aid, this brings huge
>>> recognition to the community and gets a lot of people on board.
>
>> A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
>> turn money into LilyPond.  The truth is that we can turn enthusiasm into
>> LilyPond.
>
> How to turn enthousiasm into LilyPond, if people are unaware of it's
> existence.  Long before we go SponsorshipMeister, I would suggest a
> PRMeister.

I don't think that people are unaware of its existence.  Mutopia has
more than 1500 pieces by now.  Those did not exactly fall from some
tree.

>> We don't make the best of our potential for selling LilyPond out.
>> But we should not run into trap of making money a metric for the
>> success of LilyPond or its contributors.
>
> So what would be a valid metric for LilyPond's success?  Can we
> determine where the hanging fruit is that we are missing in selling
> LilyPond out?

Are we missing something?  With all the "things should be better" talk,
I can't help noticing that we have great and dedicated people working on
a totally large software project with about a dozen translations, likely
the best documentation system of the GNU project, and really large
uptake and mindshare (try making a list of all serious music
manipulating software on GNU/Linux that does _not_ offer at least an
export to LilyPond: you'll not find much).

--
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: musescore lands sponsoring?

Federico Bruni
In reply to this post by Jan Nieuwenhuizen
2012/5/29 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]>:
>
> Just to make sure you have seen
>
>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>

What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191

Maybe you mean that writing a .ly file would have allowed better tweaking?
(I have no idea of the MuseScore workflow)

Or it's about the input?
If it's technically superior because it's text-based, I would agree
with you for a number of reasons.
In this particular case, there's another benefit: no need to write
from scratch because Golden Variations are in Mutopia
http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/make-table.cgi?collection=bachgb&preview=1

Anyway, I think that the main reason why MuseScore is much more
popular than LilyPond is simply because it's a GUI program.
Considering your efforts in Schikkers List, I can imagine that you may
agree with me.

Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
music schools in my area.
But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).
The other big obstacle is: schools in general (in any area) organize
classes and workshops on software programs used by the industry.
LilyPond should be first introduced in the publishing industry...
but... how many geeks work in the music publishing companies?

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

David Kastrup
Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> writes:

> 2012/5/29 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Just to make sure you have seen
>>
>>  
>>  http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>>
>> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
>> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>>
>
> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?

How about the input?  You can put a lot of information in the input
about the autograph, in comments, in alternate code paths.

> Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
> music schools in my area.
> But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
> scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).

I am not sure about that.  It is fast, readable, efficient.  In
contrast, MusiXTeX is an incomprehensible nightmare of technoblurb.

--
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: musescore lands sponsoring?

Rodolfo Zitellini
In reply to this post by Federico Bruni
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2012/5/29 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Just to make sure you have seen
>>
>>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>>
>> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
>> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>>
>
> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
> I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191
>
> Maybe you mean that writing a .ly file would have allowed better tweaking?
> (I have no idea of the MuseScore workflow)
>
> Or it's about the input?
> If it's technically superior because it's text-based, I would agree
> with you for a number of reasons.
> In this particular case, there's another benefit: no need to write
> from scratch because Golden Variations are in Mutopia
> http://www.mutopiaproject.org/cgibin/make-table.cgi?collection=bachgb&preview=1
>
> Anyway, I think that the main reason why MuseScore is much more
> popular than LilyPond is simply because it's a GUI program.
> Considering your efforts in Schikkers List, I can imagine that you may
> agree with me.
>
+1
I think too GUI is the main reason too. I love Lilypond and I use it
for all my projects (I'm trying to setup a small publishing house
which will be lilypond-only), and I'm pushing it strongly for the uni
I'm affiliated with, for the moment without success. We publish a
series of baroque-centered books, and all the layout is done in-house
(no professionals involved) with finale or sibelius. Generally
speaking, my colleagues just want to point-and-click, move around
stuff and so on. It does not matter that what I do in lily
automagically can take hours in finale - when I show the text input
people just go away scared. I tried many times demoing a project
conversion from finale to lily, where you get almost magically a very
nice output. When people learn they cannot click and move stuff on the
screen, they just say "no way" and back up. (on the plus side, I will
probably editing one of the next volumes, and the condition I posed
was to use lily exclusively).

Cheers
Rodolfo

ps for David: did you receive my email?

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

janek.lilypond
In reply to this post by Federico Bruni
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:56 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?

I think it's not a matter of "what".  We are technically superior
indeed (i've checked their score and Lily would engrave it better).
It's the "just do it" thingy.  We don't have anyone who would just do it.
I'd love to handle this, but i already have more Lily activities that
i can manage... :(


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM, David Kastrup <[hidden email]> wrote:
> A "SponsorshipMeister" is dangerously close to the premise that we can
> turn money into LilyPond.

I'd say that we can turn /some/ money into LilyPond: without money,
you wouldn't be able to work on Lily.  Another example: Mike could
spend more time on Lily if he didn't have to do fundraising for his
ensemble and his compositional work (correct me if i remembered this
wrong).
The problem is that we cannot guarantee anything specific.

> We don't make the best of our potential for selling LilyPond out.  But
> we should not run into trap of making money a metric for the success of
> LilyPond or its contributors.

+1


On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 1:45 PM, Federico Bruni <[hidden email]> wrote:

> 2012/5/29 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]>:
>>
>> Just to make sure you have seen
>>
>>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>>
>> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
>> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?
>>
>
> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
> I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191

This isn't Lily output, it's directly from MuseScore.
You were fooled by the fact that MuseScore uses our Feta font.

> Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
> music schools in my area.
> But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
> scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).

There is a chance, but only when the syntax is *obvious* enough.
Currently used syntax isn't obvious enough, but it won't be difficult
to change it, i think.

Take this example:

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  r4 e8(-> gis <>) ^"sul D" \f \> << \repeat unfold 8 { cis-. } { s2
s2^\markup { \italic "rit." } } >>
  <>\sfz <>\downbow \repeat unfold 2 { cis8 gis } <fis cis'>1\>
<>\enddecr \mark \markup { \musicglyph #"scripts.coda" }
  << a1 { s2\< s2\> } >> <>\!
}

Looks like a mystery to non-geeks.  But, if we just define some nice
commands (actually, some of them already exist, but they usually
aren't encouraged so many people don't know about them) we may end up
with something like this (just a rough example):

\relative c' {
  \key a \major
  rest4 e8 \accent \beginSlur gsharp csharp \endSlur \staccato \"sul
D" \forte \decrescendoHairpin csharp \staccato csharp \staccato csharp
\staccato |
  csharp \staccato \ritardando csharp \staccato csharp \staccato
csharp \staccato csharp \downBow \sforzando gsharp csharp gsharp |
  \chord { fsharp csharp' }1 \decrescrendoHairpin |
  \coda
  a1 \crescrendoHairpin \decrescendoHairpin
}

Sure, it's much longer, but everything's pretty obvious even for
someone who sees lily code for the first time.

> The other big obstacle is: schools in general (in any area) organize
> classes and workshops on software programs used by the industry.
> LilyPond should be first introduced in the publishing industry...
> but... how many geeks work in the music publishing companies?

There is a plan to change this.  Currently it's top secret ;) because
we don't know if it'll work out, but if it does, we'll need help.
We'll post a call to arms on user, be ready :)

cheers,
Janek

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Federico Bruni
2012/5/29 Janek Warchoł <[hidden email]>:
>> What do you mean with "technically superior"? It's about the output?
>> I think it's LilyPond output. Can you confirm?
>> http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/node/191
>
> This isn't Lily output, it's directly from MuseScore.
> You were fooled by the fact that MuseScore uses our Feta font.
>

Ok, I suck with recognizing the output.. I was quite sure to be wrong :-)

>> Last year I was thinking about trying to introduce LilyPond in some
>> music schools in my area.
>> But then I realized that anyone who is not a kind of geek will be
>> scared away by the text input (no matter how powerful it is).
>
> There is a chance, but only when the syntax is *obvious* enough.
> Currently used syntax isn't obvious enough, but it won't be difficult
> to change it, i think.
[cut]
> Sure, it's much longer, but everything's pretty obvious even for
> someone who sees lily code for the first time.
>

You are right, this is important.
But there are many people who don't want to even _see_ a text file, so
they don't care about nice/bad syntax.

Rodolfo's experience (see previous email) is probably common to many of us.

>> The other big obstacle is: schools in general (in any area) organize
>> classes and workshops on software programs used by the industry.
>> LilyPond should be first introduced in the publishing industry...
>> but... how many geeks work in the music publishing companies?
>
> There is a plan to change this.  Currently it's top secret ;) because
> we don't know if it'll work out, but if it does, we'll need help.
> We'll post a call to arms on user, be ready :)

Great! Ready to help if I can

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Han-Wen Nienhuys-3
In reply to this post by Jan Nieuwenhuizen
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 4:56 AM, Jan Nieuwenhuizen <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Just to make sure you have seen
>
>    http://www.opengoldbergvariations.org/b-sendorfer-sponsors-open-goldberg-project-providing-concert-grand-ceus-recording-technology-0
>
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?

Yes, certainly.

> What are we missing?

Werner is a crack coder, just look at
https://github.com/musescore/MuseScore to see how he cranked this out
in just 3 days.

kidding aside, I think a GUI appeals to more people, both developers,
users and passers-by (I notice some people that used to be active on
the LilyPond list on their site). What I don't get is that they chose
a Bach work as a demo. While interesting from a typesetting
perspective, the primary value of MuseScore is not copying existing
work, but being able to edit new works.

I wonder how much tweaks they needed to get the output they are showing.

Also, their sponsorship was for a recorded version of the work, ie.
for sound. More people are interested in sound rather than printed
matter.

--
Han-Wen Nienhuys - [hidden email] - http://www.xs4all.nl/~hanwen

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Nils Hammerfest
In reply to this post by Marc Weber
On Tue, 29 May 2012 10:15:31 +0200
Marc Weber <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Musecore fails to render some specific cases when printing - but
> exporting to lilypond seems to work in all (little) cases I tried.
>
> Thus for simple cases I like that combination: musescore for typing and
> lilypond for rendering.

AFAIK musescore dropped Lilypond export support because of a lack of interest and in favour of musicXML (whatever that means, I read it somewhere on the musescore twitter account or something like this).
It may still work, but we can expect it to break a little more with each Lilypond release.

Nils

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Lucas Gonze
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Nils <[hidden email]> wrote:
> AFAIK musescore dropped Lilypond export support because of a lack of interest and in favour of musicXML (whatever that means, I read it somewhere on the musescore twitter account or something like this).
> It may still work, but we can expect it to break a little more with each Lilypond release.

Musecore and Lilypond are both open source. A GUI would benefit
Lilypond. There's no reason for a Lilypond person to not work on .ly
export from the Musecore front end.

I feel like this conversation is unnecessarily competitive. These
projects have a *lot* in common. I am rooting for both.

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Hans Aikema-2
In reply to this post by Nils Hammerfest
On 29-5-2012 23:16, Nils wrote:

> On Tue, 29 May 2012 10:15:31 +0200
> Marc Weber<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Musecore fails to render some specific cases when printing - but
>> exporting to lilypond seems to work in all (little) cases I tried.
>>
>> Thus for simple cases I like that combination: musescore for typing and
>> lilypond for rendering.
> AFAIK musescore dropped Lilypond export support because of a lack of interest and in favour of musicXML (whatever that means, I read it somewhere on the musescore twitter account or something like this).
> It may still work, but we can expect it to break a little more with each Lilypond release.
>
> Nils
>
> _______________________________________________
> lilypond-user mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
> .
>
Nils,

Isn't it the 'dropped lilypond import', which apparently has been
dropped the second time recently?

http://musescore.org/en/node/14273

AFAIK they intend to keep .ly export, but refuse to do .ly import unless
new developers want to pick up the task of fixing and maintaining the
importer code as import would need to be able to handle the various
changes in the lilypond source format gracefully.
The export is easier to maintain as they just write the \version in the
.ly file and leave it up to the user to run convert-ly and modify
anything that convert-ly can't handle itself when using a more recent
version of Lilypond.

regards,
Hans

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Nick Payne-3
In reply to this post by David Kastrup
On 29/05/12 20:44, David Kastrup wrote:
> Jan Nieuwenhuizen<[hidden email]>  writes:
>
>>
>> How to turn enthousiasm into LilyPond, if people are unaware of it's
>> existence.  Long before we go SponsorshipMeister, I would suggest a
>> PRMeister.
> I don't think that people are unaware of its existence.  Mutopia has
> more than 1500 pieces by now.  Those did not exactly fall from some
> tree.

Speaking of which, Mutopia seems to be pretty much moribund. I sent a
score to their contributions e-mail address a couple of months ago,
which was never acknowledged and hasn't appeared on the web site. Nor
did I get a response to a mail pointing out a couple of errors in scores
already on the web site, and nothing has appeared there since early
February.

Nick

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

Re: musescore lands sponsoring?

Carl Sorensen
In reply to this post by Jan Nieuwenhuizen
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <janneke <at> gnu.org> writes:

 
> Wouldn't LilyPond have been a technically superior choice for this
> sponsoring project?  What are we missing?

Somebody who was willing to run a Kickstarter project and make it happen.

The people who put the project together choose their tools, mostly from
personal preference.  The sponsorship was for the project, not the
software, at least as I read the Kickstarter history.

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: musescore lands sponsoring?

David Kastrup
In reply to this post by Lucas Gonze
Lucas Gonze <[hidden email]> writes:

> On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Nils <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> AFAIK musescore dropped Lilypond export support because of a lack of
>> interest and in favour of musicXML (whatever that means, I read it
>> somewhere on the musescore twitter account or something like this).
>> It may still work, but we can expect it to break a little more with
>> each Lilypond release.
>
> Musecore and Lilypond are both open source. A GUI would benefit
> Lilypond. There's no reason for a Lilypond person to not work on .ly
> export from the Musecore front end.

MuseScore is not a GUI for LilyPond, like LilyPond is not a frontend for
PostScript.  If it were a GUI for LilyPond, you could send a LilyPond
file to a MuseScore guy, and he would make some amendments with
MuseScore and send you back the changed LilyPond file.

There's no reason for a PostScript person to not work on .ps export from
the LilyPond front end, but that does not mean that when he tweaks some
noteheads, you can reimport those tweaks into into the original LilyPond
source.

--
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: musescore lands sponsoring?

Colin Campbell-8
On 12-05-29 10:36 PM, David Kastrup wrote:

>
> MuseScore is not a GUI for LilyPond, like LilyPond is not a frontend for
> PostScript.  If it were a GUI for LilyPond, you could send a LilyPond
> file to a MuseScore guy, and he would make some amendments with
> MuseScore and send you back the changed LilyPond file.
>
> There's no reason for a PostScript person to not work on .ps export from
> the LilyPond front end, but that does not mean that when he tweaks some
> noteheads, you can reimport those tweaks into into the original LilyPond
> source.
>


For interest's sake: there was a discussion on slashdot today:
http://entertainment.slashdot.org/story/12/05/29/0015231/open-source-bach-project-completed-score-and-recording-now-online

Colin

--
I've learned that you shouldn't go through life with a catcher's mitt on both hands.
You need to be able to throw something back.
-Maya Angelou, poet (1928- )


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