Hi Urs (et al.), > In any projects not all contributors have to be proficient with all aspects, > particularly not with beautifying the final output.
Agreed. > Nevertheless people should be able to provide their input without requiring > too much hand-holding and without producing an inappropriate amount of errors. That, but also more. They should at least have: a good understanding of best (or at least better) practices in terms of structuring the Lilypond code (unless that was done for them beforehand, and they’re just “filling in the blanks”); a good sense of when a manual process might be replaced efficiently and effectively with an automated one (e.g., a new function or engraver), even if they can’t create that solution themselves; etc. Unless I had seen several examples of the Lilypond code (not just output!) that someone had generated recently, I wouldn’t even consider sending them a hand-written manuscript to engrave from scratch. Cheers, Kieren. _______________________ Kieren MacMillan, composer www: <http://www.kierenmacmillan.info> email: i...@kierenmacmillan.info _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
