James <pkx1...@gmail.com> writes: > Hello, > > On 5 March 2012 07:45, Phil Holmes <m...@philholmes.net> wrote: >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Graham Percival" >> <gra...@percival-music.ca> >> To: "Colin Hall" <colingh...@gmail.com> >> >>>> Let's drop Lilypad. It's getting in the way of regular releases. >>> >>> >>> Disagree. >>> >> >> Disagree. I'm with Colin. I've already said that I can't see the point of >> it on Windows: it's a cut-down version of notepad. If it's the same on Mac, >> I don't see the value. > > \PointAndClickOn > > That was a great feature for a 'mac user' like me. While I can run CLI > in terminal.app, getting another editor to work with pointAndClick was > fruitless and frustrating (at least for 2.12 and 2.13.x when I had my > mac). > > So I'm with Graham on this one.
As far as I understand, in spite of the initial activities of core LilyPond developers, LilyPad is basically an external application that we just wrap and don't actively codevelop (meaning that its overlap with actual LilyPond development nowadays is rather minimal). The principal goal is setting up the user with an environment where he can start working right away. We could pick a different target for that purpose. Personally, I want to get to a state where Emacs will make a compellingly useful part of the music creation toolchain. But it would still not be something you would want to install as part of an installer for LilyPond. It's more like it would be nice to have some functionality looking for an installed version of Emacs and integrating with it. I think Frescobaldo might be a nice fit by now (as far as I understand, it does no longer require KDE, merely Qt). It does quite more than LilyPad, integrates nice with a GUI, and still does not obscure working with LilyPond, like the applications NtEd and similar do. If you take a look at <URL:http://frescobaldi.org/download>, you'll find that it is almost but not quite in a situation where we could use it on all supported platforms when precompiled. It would be more challenging to let GUB actually compile it (and dependencies). A perspective for delivering it as an integrated part of installers for those platforms where we have to offer a complete bundle due to a lack of sane packaging systems. Oh, by the way: any of the OSX users have an idea what is up with Fink? I see <URL:http://pdb.finkproject.org/pdb/browse.php?summary=lilypond> lilypond 2.12.2-1 GNU Music Typesetter lilypond-devel 2.13.5-1 GNU Music Typesetter Which is not exactly impressive. But I am digressing. The point I wanted to make is that if one can cut out a coherent set of requirements, it might be possible to get people from the Frescobaldi community involved, and challenged into making MacOSX work if that's a precondition for getting Frescobaldi into our installers. The problem is that we can't even cut out a coherent set of requirements for keeping LilyPad supported, let alone start on something new. So it would be clear that whoever was going to get interested in this project would have to start with a _lot_ of fumbling in the dark with uncertain outcome. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel