Hello Valentin, yes, that would be the best way.
Cheers, Paolo On Tuesday, October 19, 2021, Valentin Petzel <valen...@petzel.at> wrote: > Hello Paolo, > > I did not mean it this way. I meant it like: In most cases one can prepare > a > score using Lilypond 2.23 (so using Spontini) that is compatible with a > Lilypond 2.18 version. > > So Saul can probably use Spontini and 2.23 to do his tweaks and still > obtain a > 2.18 compatible file. > > Cheers, > Valentin > > Am Dienstag, 19. Oktober 2021, 09:15:31 CEST schrieb Paolo Prete: > > Hello Valentin, > > > > porting the scheme/LilyPond functions used by Spontini-Editor, in its > > internal library, from 2.18 to 2.19, would not complete the > compatibility. > > In fact, the editor relies on the SVG code generation too, which had > > changes during these years of LilyPond development. > > Therefore, the only way that Saul could use to accomplish what he asked, > is > > to convert his score from 2.18 to >=2.19.84 and then feed Spontini-Editor > > with the converted score. > > > > > > Best, > > P > > > > On Tuesday, October 19, 2021, Valentin Petzel <valen...@petzel.at> > wrote: > > > Hello Saul, > > > > > > in many cases a 2.23 ly file will be compatible with a 2.18 Lilypond. > > > > > > The only problematic cases should be when Spontini uses overrides that > did > > > not exist in 2.18 (which shouldn't be that many) or if you are using > music > > > function that have changes names or syntax, which can also be amended > by > > > renaming the new ones to old ones or creating wrapper music functions, > so > > > you can have a few definitions that can simply be removed for 2.18. > > > > > > But is there any reason for using such an old Lilypond version? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Valentin > > > > > > 19.10.2021 01:39:59 Saul Tobin <saul.james.to...@gmail.com>: > > > > Any possibility of using this with a Lilypond 2.18 project?
