[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: flags, beams and stem length in forced directions - output improveme

From: Carl Sorensen
Subject: Re: flags, beams and stem length in forced directions - output improvement
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2010 07:17:47 -0700

On 12/27/10 6:53 AM, "Janek Warchoł" <address@hidden>

> W dniu 27 grudnia 2010 14:02 użytkownik James Lowe
> <address@hidden> napisał:
>>> 2010/12/27 Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>:
>>> - in the first line: the stems of the b's are too short,
>> Janek,
>> See
>> I believe this is the same kind of discussion for this specific point.
> Yes.
> It was agreed back then that the current behaviour should be improved
> and nothing has been done yet (if this issue is currently being worked
> on, i apologize).
> "the same kind of discussion" - do you mean that it's bad idea to
> touch this issue because it will lead to pointless academical
> disputes? (Sorry if i misinterpret your e-mail, maybe i'm getting too
> emotional - i've spent many hours analyzing these issues, preparing
> examples and figuring out in what order should they be discussed, and
> i very much want all this being fixed...).


I appreciate your work.  And I appreciate your raising the issue.  I think
it's very helpful to have discussions that identify the ideal behavior of
LilyPond.  Once it's identified, those who are developing have a reference
when (if) they get around to fixing it.

I appreciate the fact that you want this to be fixed.

However, we currently don't have enough developers working on LilyPond to
handle bugs and enhancement requests as fast as they appear.  The list is
getting longer, not shorter.  So, although clarifying an issue like this is
necessary to get it solved, there's no guarantee that it will get solved
just because it is clarified.

The *only* way for you to guarantee it is solved is for *you* to do the
work.  If you do it, you can guarantee it's done the way you like it.

You *might* be able to raise its priority by offering a bounty.  If you can
get other users to also contribute, that would increase the bounty, and
*might* get some developer to work on it.  Although it is my experience that
bounties are never high enough to pay a reasonable rate for solving the
problem, they do indicate something that users really care about, so they
may help a particular issue move forward.

Clarifying the problem also *might* help an issue be solved quicker.  It
does two things.  First, it clarifies the bounds of a solution.  Second, it
demonstrates interest among a wider base of the LilyPond community, which
may make a developer more interested in solving the issue.

Another way might be to recruit somebody else to join the developer pool.
Do you have friends who are interested in both music and programming?  Might
one of them be willing to join the development team?

Currently, LilyPond is short of the critical mass of programmers necessary
to aggressively add new features.  We can barely solve the critical issues
(it's been months since we decided to try to release 2.14, and we still have
one critical issue left).

I'm not trying to discourage you from continuing your work on this issue.
I'm trying to clarify the current state of the development team so that you
won't spend hours on this, and expect that once the decision is complete,
the work will automatically be done, only to be disappointed in the end.
I'm also inviting you to either join the development team or recruit
somebody who will join the development team to work on the issues that you
find most important.



reply via email to

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