[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development
From: |
Ralph Little |
Subject: |
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development |
Date: |
Wed, 17 Nov 2004 11:02:57 -0000 |
Hi,
Undeniably the mass market at the moment would look to be using Windoze
as a platform.
If we could see an end to dependance on Cygwin, that would (partly) open
the door to mass acceptance of Lilypond by the general public.
Certainly if, as Erik says it could be boxed up for one-step
installation so that the Cygwin layer were packaged up with it, novice
users would find it more acceptable.
I did try to install Cygwin once in the past just to see what it was
like and it was clunky to say the least.
Ordinary users just don't want that hassle. A lot of issues raised on
the users groups seem to be related to Cygwin and getting it up and
running.
Seeing Lilypond in the shops in a box would be so cool and would be nice
to see some of the revenue returned to assist our friends Han-Wen, Jan
et al.
Regards,
Ralph
>
> I believe that in the end, if finale & sibelius are to be beaten,
someone
> should also sell lilypond in some kind of nice boxed form. I believe
that it
> too often happens that a musician just goes to the music shop, and
checks
> ....<snip>
--------------------------------------
address@hidden
www.tribaldata.co.uk
...or see what I do in my spare time:
www.skelmanthorpeband.org
--------------------------------------
"Man who shoot off mouth... expect to lose face."
---------
Tribal Data Solutions has moved, please visit our website for more details
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk.
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and are sent on the basis of
our copyright, e-mail and security policy which can be inspected by visiting
http://www.tribaldata.co.uk/policies.asp.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender and delete this
message. Thank you.
-----------
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, (continued)
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Graham Percival, 2004/11/08
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Erik Sandberg, 2004/11/10
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development,
Ralph Little <=
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Johannes Schindelin, 2004/11/17
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/11/17
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Johannes Schindelin, 2004/11/17
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Erik Sandberg, 2004/11/17
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Han-Wen Nienhuys, 2004/11/18
- Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Erik Sandberg, 2004/11/19
Re: battle-plan for 2.5 development, Mats Bengtsson, 2004/11/17