On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:28 AM, James
<address@hidden> wrote:
David,
I saw that Colin had opened a tracker for your *ly file
http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=2445
I'm not a code developer, however I think it might be better to also
open a Rietveld issue so that it gets a proper review, from my own
experience, it is more likely to be looked at there than in the google
tracker - simply because it is easier to read and comment inline.
I don't know if you are familiar with that process, then if you are
serious about getting this into the LilyPond code, you can work on it
here and post the suggested changes etc.
I fear otherwise it will stagnate *just* an attachment on a tracker.
You can use git-cl to ease the process of uploading and updating both
Rietveld and the tracker at the same time.
http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.15/Documentation/contributor/summary-for-experienced-developers
It doesn't mean that it has to compile necessarily or be perfect from
the 'start' (for instance Mike Solomon often throws up 'concept'
patches or 'work in progress' patches/code to Rietveld for comment.
Sometimes they die there but more often than not they get improved
very quickly simply because of the way to compare and share
information in Rietveld.
Thank you for your attention and suggestions. I would be interested in working on this engraver with a view to getting something like it into the code base eventually, and I certainly do need feedback to improve it Taking the preliminary steps to get it up on Rietveld will require a bit of study which I'm eager to do. The big issue for me, however, is that I don't know if it's wise to install lilydev on my current computer. It's been multiply (and for me, unfathomably) partitioned and I don't want to add to the mess since I use the computer so heavily for my teaching job. I never have been able to use the internet with the Ubuntu partition. Probably any work I do with lilydev will have to wait for another computer.
In the meantime, I suppose I can upload the engraver as a snippet. (It will work with 2.14.2). This isn't a great solution, but at least it won't get lost.
Thanks,
David