[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: problematic commit

From: Graham Percival
Subject: Re: problematic commit
Date: Wed, 27 Oct 2010 21:54:35 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)

On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:02:48PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <address@hidden> wrote:
> > I'm interested to know how successful your sales pitch has been.  I did a 
> > free software talk a few weeks ago but talked mostly about Pure Data and 
> > Ardour, plus music-oriented distros of GNU/Linux.
> I suspect that it may be (ever so slightly!) easier than "selling"
> LilyPond, since graphical applications have a little more "bling" than
> austere text-oriented apps like LilyPond.
> (Oh, you were referring to Pure Data. Ok, never mind.)

Zing!  That was a cheap shot.

> > If your audience cringes at \include "", what do they do when 
> > they learn how to put "ca." in front of a metronome marking, or change the 
> > direction of a tie after a line break?
> ? I have no idea what you're referring to. Is that something you need
> to do with Finale? (If so, it may give me a nice argument when people
> object that LilyPond is too complex :-)

He means "if your audience is so text-hostile that they can't
understand \include, then there's no bloody way that they can
write scheme code and overrides, so they won't like lilypond

- Graham

reply via email to

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