lilypond-user
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Future of openLilyLib


From: Andrew Bernard
Subject: Re: Future of openLilyLib
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2020 01:42:49 +1100

Hi JanPeter,

I have contributed a bit to OLL and its machinery and I think it is an
important and indeed necessary resource. I am not sure why the uptake
is so limited, but I think somehow we have to communicate how easy it
is to install and use more effectively.

One thing that concerns me with lilypond at the present is what I see
as a sort of balkanisation of code. We have LSR, OLL, and people
making one-shot GIT repos, and it's all very fragmented. I don't think
this is good for newcomers, and splitting like this is never good for
open source projects. I can see the arguments for all these ways of
making add-ons for lilypond, but it worries me. Yes, LSR is for
snippets and exemplars, not necessarily for full blown code as OLL is,
but lately there has been a lot of the latter in LSR that I feel could
be in OLL.

And then there is this sort of impedance mismatch balkanisation - I
think OLL should be a feeder into lilypond core, but it appears this
may never happen. I'd like to promote that idea more. One example
comes to mind: \shapeII. I have hammered this to a high degree in
thousands of uses in hundreds of pages of scores over the years. Yes
there is a small corner case bug or two with it, but nothing stopping
it going into lilypond I think. It's probably the function I use in
lilypond more than any other one. In other words, purely from my
experience, I think it is pretty well tested and would be a good
candidate for inclusion. Some of the pedal work that Harm and I did
ought to be in lilypond also I think. What I am saying is that I see
OLL as a long term incubator for lilypond features. Just a couple of
ideas from me.

I am ready, willing and able to work on OLL, so please be aware of that.

Andrew


On Wed, 7 Oct 2020 at 00:33, Jan-Peter Voigt <jp.voigt@gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I would like to repeat Urs' call to participate in the work of OLL. I
> share the opinion that it is a very versatile and powerful toolbox. My
> own contributions are mainly the edition-engraver and the
> lalily-templates. If you have any questions about what they are and how
> they work, feel free to contact me via this list or py pm.
>
> Best,
> Jan-Peter



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]