Re: Announcement: A Lilypond 'cloud' website

2012-07-13 Thread m . tarenskeen

Citeren Mike Blackstock blackstock.m...@gmail.com:


If you think the approach has potential, as a kind of 'google docs' for
Lilypond, and can help with occasional testing and feedback,  please reply,
preferably off-list. I'll be starting a mailing-list eventually.

url - http://cloud.blackstockweb.ca


Hi,

I like the idea.
How does it compare to http://lilybin.com ?
Maybe you can share ideas / work together ?
The two projects seem to be very much in the same field.

--

MT


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


Re: articulate not working ?

2012-02-14 Thread m . tarenskeen

Citeren David Kastrup d...@gnu.org:


Martin Tarenskeen m.tarensk...@zonnet.nl writes:


it seems to me nothing is wrong with this example:

\include articulate.ly
\score {
  \unfoldRepeats \articulate 
\context Staff {
  \set Staff.midiInstrument=clarinet
  \relative c' {
\time 4/4 \tempo 4=100
c4-. c4( d e |
f\trill) g\turn a b |
c1--
  }
}
  
  \midi {}
  %\layout {}
}

but with Lilypond-2.15.29 it does not do anything. It does not give an
error, but the trills are not executed.

when I reinstalled Lilypond-2.14.2 everything was OK again.

regression ?


Of articulate.ly, probably.  This is quite likely due to EventChord
changes (issue 2240).  articulate.ly is not considered part of LilyPond,
mainly because unlike LilyPond, you can't relicense it under versions of
the GPL later than 3.0 at your choice once those come out.

I'll take a look, but unless this is rather simple to do, you might be
better off contacting its author.


Is he reading this mailinglist(s) ? Can't find his e-mail address.

--

MT

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user


Re: problems with learning lilypond

2008-11-28 Thread m . tarenskeen

Citeren John Sellers [EMAIL PROTECTED]:

confronted with multiple choice, none of which are distinguished from 
each other in regard as to the best one to pick.


If I understood what was said, the 2.11 and later documentation is 
better than 2.10 and earlier.  Why would I look at 2.11


I suggest to add only one small word to the link on the webpage to the 
2.11 docs: ( Recommended ! )


That should be enough to make an end to the confusion ?

Martin


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user