Re: Final resolution of issue 4751

[Carl Sorensen]

On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 4:20 PM Valentin Villenave
<address@hidden> wrote:
>
> On 5/16/20, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I don't really have a good idea here.
>
> Looks like quite a mess.  I’ve re-categorized it as Status::Started,
> and removed the Fixed_2_19_44 label for now.  I‘ve also linked it with
> issue #4781 since it seems there’s quite a bit of overlap.

I think Status::Started is wrong, since it has been pushed in some form.

I think I will check through it again and see if I can make a better
determination, instead of having it go to Started.

I suspect the best thing to do is to close this issue, since it's so
messed up (a push, and closed, and reopened, and closed again, even
before today).

If there are problems with musicxml2ly, I think it deserves a new issue.

>
> Jean, since you wanted to dive into musicxml stuff, perhaps you could
> investigate exactly what parts of John Gourlay’s work got merged
> (and/or possibly un-merged) and whether there remain some potentially
> interesting leftovers? There’s a good chance that was the last time
> anyone did any substantial work on musicxml import, so perhaps that
> would be as good an entry point as any (though, I’m afraid, not very
> glamorous).

If Jean wants to do it, I think it should follow after a resolution of
this issue.

Thanks,

Carl

>
> Cheers,
> -- V.