Re: openlilylib pull request
Simon Albrecht writes: > On 08/05/2022 20:37, Jean Abou Samra wrote: >> The case study of how OLL fell out of maintenance is one of the >> things leading me to think that a model where snippets providing >> significant functionality and becoming somewhat popular get >> upstreamed into the LilyPond core is a better fit for LilyPond >> than them letting them be provided through external packages. > > > In many cases, that may be true. In other cases, it really makes sense > to allow for a more flexible space of user code available to the > community. > > The TeX ecosystem may have some issues with maintaining packages and > especially with interoperability, but it provides an unbelievable > wealth of high-quality additions to the core software that could never > be provided otherwise. Due to the relative lack of adoption and the > small size of the community LilyPond can’t seem to take some threshold > toward creating a similarly stable ecosystem (so far?). The "TeX ecosystem" consists of plain TeX with fudge-ons (comparable to LilyPond and LSR snippets), of the monolithic Context (driven by a not-much-more-than-one-man company), and of the modular LaTeX. The only system that has exploded in number and functionality of extensions and styles is LaTeX. That suggests that the development potential is not as much dependent on the underlying technology but of readily available interfaces for integrating both functionality as well as document styles into a fixed framework. -- David Kastrup
Re: openlilylib pull request
On 08/05/2022 20:37, Jean Abou Samra wrote: The case study of how OLL fell out of maintenance is one of the things leading me to think that a model where snippets providing significant functionality and becoming somewhat popular get upstreamed into the LilyPond core is a better fit for LilyPond than them letting them be provided through external packages. In many cases, that may be true. In other cases, it really makes sense to allow for a more flexible space of user code available to the community. The TeX ecosystem may have some issues with maintaining packages and especially with interoperability, but it provides an unbelievable wealth of high-quality additions to the core software that could never be provided otherwise. Due to the relative lack of adoption and the small size of the community LilyPond can’t seem to take some threshold toward creating a similarly stable ecosystem (so far?). Best, Simon
Re: openlilylib pull request
Le 08/05/2022 à 20:37, Jean Abou Samra a écrit : Le 08/05/2022 à 20:08, Simon Albrecht a écrit : Dear community, I have made some small updates to keep the openlilylib/bezier module working with current versions of LilyPond and created a pull request on GitHub. Is anyone currently able to notice and approve the request? I don't think so. Urs left the community, as you know (and for reasons unknown to me). I haven't seen anyone really maintaining OLL recently. Andrew (in CC) had set up http://openlilylib.space/ and a migration to GitLab at some point, but the website has been down for a while, and I can't find the repo on GitLab. If I recall correctly, the main people involved in coding OLL apart from Urs and Andrew were Janek and Jan-Peter. Both of them are inactive at the moment. Did I miss anyone? (The activity period of OLL was before I started getting involved.) I may be wrong, but I guess the most straightforward path for you right now is to fork this repository and advertise the fork. The case study of how OLL fell out of maintenance is one of the things leading me to think that a model where snippets providing significant functionality and becoming somewhat popular get upstreamed into the LilyPond core is a better fit for LilyPond than them letting them be provided through external packages. PS: I wrote this before actually looking at the PR, and coincidentally it turns out that it removes code for a functionality that I integrated into the core :-) (Although I wasn't even aware that it existed in OLL at the time, and just implemented it following a 10-year-old issue in the tracker, opened by Urs.) Best, Jean
Re: openlilylib pull request
Le 08/05/2022 à 20:08, Simon Albrecht a écrit : Dear community, I have made some small updates to keep the openlilylib/bezier module working with current versions of LilyPond and created a pull request on GitHub. Is anyone currently able to notice and approve the request? I don't think so. Urs left the community, as you know (and for reasons unknown to me). I haven't seen anyone really maintaining OLL recently. Andrew (in CC) had set up http://openlilylib.space/ and a migration to GitLab at some point, but the website has been down for a while, and I can't find the repo on GitLab. If I recall correctly, the main people involved in coding OLL apart from Urs and Andrew were Janek and Jan-Peter. Both of them are inactive at the moment. Did I miss anyone? (The activity period of OLL was before I started getting involved.) I may be wrong, but I guess the most straightforward path for you right now is to fork this repository and advertise the fork. The case study of how OLL fell out of maintenance is one of the things leading me to think that a model where snippets providing significant functionality and becoming somewhat popular get upstreamed into the LilyPond core is a better fit for LilyPond than them letting them be provided through external packages. Jean
openlilylib pull request
Dear community, I have made some small updates to keep the openlilylib/bezier module working with current versions of LilyPond and created a pull request on GitHub. Is anyone currently able to notice and approve the request? Best, Simon
