Re OLL, why not, actually? Putting into OLL is a simple matter of
creating a directory and placing the unmodified code in a file names
module.ily. It's nice to provide an example file to go along with it
as well. That's very little 'adaptation'.
Urs and I are trying to promote OLL by explaining how easy it is to
use, and how useful. Fragmenting there world into core, LSR, OLL, GIT
of various flavors make it harder for the poor end user I would say.
That's four sources for code for end users all with different usages.
I am not fond of fragmentation. I cannot imagine Harm would object to
being in OLL. The pedal code I worked on with him is there already,
and he has never objected.
Happy to help putting it in OLL. It may not happen for a decade, or
it may never happen, but as far as getting new things into core, I
would like to think that OLL modules are a prime candidate, not
isolated git repos here and there.
If it works great and people are using, then it's perfectly suitable
for OLL.
Andrew
On 23/09/2020 7:51 am, Federico Bruni wrote:
I'm against the idea of putting it in OLL.
As it's still a work in progress, Harm so far worked on his own
files (no git) and post them on the mailing list. The snippets on
OLL should follow some guidelines and I'm not willing to adapt
Harm's code to OLL in first place (or if/when a new version is
available).
But the code, even if not perfect, is working great already and some
people are using it. That's why I think it should be hosted on
gitlab.
I will open a thread on lilypond-devel.