[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Sponsoring lilypond development Was Re: Score parts: instrument and

From: Laura Conrad
Subject: Re: Sponsoring lilypond development Was Re: Score parts: instrument and duration
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2005 11:23:11 -0400
User-agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux)

>>>>> "ES" == Erik Sandberg <address@hidden> writes:

    ES> A fairly unrelated question is: Why are so many preferring
    ES> PMX/MusiXTeX to Lily? I often have better chances finding good
    ES> MusiXTeX scores on Werner Icking archive, than finding them on
    ES> mutopia.

Not to discourage discussion of the original question, but I don't
think the number of scores on the Icking Archive versus the number on
Mutopia is a good measure of the relative number of users of PMX and
Lily.  The Icking Archive is a repository of just about any kind of
scores (including those produced by non-free software, and probably
some lilypond), and only a small minority of the lilypond on the web
is ever submitted to mutopia.

Getting back to why to prefer PMX to lily -- there's the suggestion
Han-Wen made recently that I might prefer it because the development
cycle is less hectic and the half-life of the code might be longer.
I've been looking into it -- so far I've proved that the native input
is less friendly for barless music, but I might be able to figure out
editor macros to get around that.

Laura (mailto:address@hidden , )
(617) 661-8097  fax: (501) 641-5011
233 Broadway, Cambridge, MA 02139

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]