Paolo,
I really think Carl did not intend to be harsh. He even explicitely tried to
avoid making you taking it as an offence:
> I'm trying not to be mean in this answer, but to explain the way
> LilyPond development works.
It is a confusion in my eyes. Look,
> If you really want this worked on, here are a few ideas:
Carl told you what you needed in the gentlest possible way. Written
communication tends to be ambiguous, but I assure you, Carl is
really not the kind of person that could reply brutally.
Best,
Jean
(Also in response to Carl)
In Italy, we call this approach "fare la morale".
C's answer made P's words look like:
"Hey, please develop this for me." And the answer was, more or less (---> do the moral):
"If you want it to develop, collect the money."
This is absolutely the opposite of my intentions.
Instead, I pointed out that the lack of a cautionary pedal is not simply something that can be improved. And I have no problem using ugly workaround to solve it (I'm in control of my code).
Instead, it is a general problem that makes the pedal ** unusable *** in any professional score.
And it's not a problem for me, but it's a problem especially for novice users.
In any case, I reported the problem to the developers. Just as I reported to Harm that there is an error on the snippet's Midi.
They will decide what to do, according to the time they can or want to dedicate to the thing.