Re: google summer of code

[Janek Warchoł]

2012/2/10 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>> Sorry, i don't understand.  Do you think that grace timing is too
>> small or too big for GSoC?
>
> It _sounds_ too small, but may turn out to be quite a number.
> Basically, it requires a solid understanding of iterators, analyzing the
> music events occuring in grace situations, designing iteration orders
> useful for typesetting and MIDI replay, and making everything work with
> them.  Iterators are not really the best documented corner of LilyPond.

Thanks, now i better understand what's good for a GSoC idea.

2012/2/10 Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
> That might be another good avenue for a GSoC proposal - improving code
> documentation, which would therefore make it easier to get new contributors
> on board.

Unfortunately not. GSoC explicitly states that it must be about
writing code.  Documentation is explicitly excluded from GSoC.

2012/2/10 address@hidden <address@hidden>:
> It'd be great as well to see you work on your font-related projects
> such as different flag and accidental glyphs.  Also, I'm guessing
> that one does not need to devote 100% of one's GSoC time to writing
> lines of code.  LilyPond also needs lots of problems framed in terms
> of examples from the literature alongside the corresponding (possibly
> deficient) ly code.  You also do that really well

Thanks!
However i'm not sure if this qualifies for GSoC.  Sure, writing .ly
files is writing code :D but i don't think Google will like this.

> and it'd be great to have a formalized way of establishing goals via this 
> sort of research.

+1

cheers,
Janek