[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: About the new "Gigsaw".

From: Philippe Hezaine
Subject: Re: About the new "Gigsaw".
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2009 00:05:01 +0200
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090629)

Han-Wen Nienhuys a écrit :
Please write to address@hidden for inquiries.


I subscribed for a few days. I forward you my previous mail with the attached file.
Thanks for your comprehension.

On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 5:25 PM, Philippe Hezaine
<address@hidden> wrote:

I write you privately cos' (I think) you have to know the new Gigsaw
*BEFORE* any publishing under GPLv3.
I send you in attach the midi song which comes with it. It's a kind of
demo. Once you have pasted your bars in your "workroom" it takes 20 sec.
at home for getting this midi file with velocities!

I'm in a torment since a few days ago. In the Gigsaw you have within
reach all the Lilypond's sources very well targeted for making drums
patterns. More. The Gigsaw inherit from all the power of Lilypond.
Gigantic. From the very basic drum machine to the contemporary music,
without talking of the "external plug" of midi like Hydrogen, Csound,
Pd, Supercollider... and soon Ardour (I hope)
I think in a few months later, if the Gigsaw works for the users and
once the BASES are enough elaborated, we'd compete with the commercial
products and even we pass them.
And what?
1) You changed a few of the midi.scm for the compile.
2) You delete (so easily) the header in the control track
et voilà. Bye bye the GPL. You have a hijacked midi file.
At least one quickly recognize a Lilypond's sheet music.
But for its midi file? Especially for the Gigsaw and its potential?
How the FSF or any Floss supporter can check the GPL?
Nothing. At least nothing "rock solid" that i know. (Unless my post to
LAU-user with the thread :Lilypond's midi output" put my finger on it?)
Is this issue going in touch with the GPL? Again I don't know.
Perhaps I'm too imaginative, paranoid or not enough deeply free?
What is the answer? You know the Lilypond's midi implementation better
than me. Am I going against the GNU philosophy with such a thought? It's
I understand very well why the midi isn't the main focus from Lilypond.
But perhaps the Gigsaw could ask a question?
I don't want to be considered a proud person, I take things as they come
and sometimes I'm in a questioning.
If you wish the sources i can send you privately (now around 470K tar.bz2)
though the code is not at all clean yet. Anyway I'm not a dev of any kind.
And I don't write to bother you about that.
But I think the new Drummer's Gigsaw is a scoop.
All is made with Lily, gvim and midicomp.
If I can learn Texinfo I plan to do a GNU evaluation later (is that
Sorry for this agitated mood. I began to clean-cut the code (there are
many redundancies and useless commands yet, all was made by trials and
errors since two years ago) and it seems i send you the cuts.
If I write you before I end up the scripts it's because I'm really
eager to clarify this issue and also to prevent me from doing a stupid
thing. Don't hesitate to blame me if I'm wrong.
I'm hardened to it. (a sort of)
Thanks for your thoughts and input.

Superbonus-Project (Site principal) <>

Superbonus-Project (Plate-forme d'échange):

Attachment: MY-SONG+veloc.midi
Description: Binary data

reply via email to

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