Re: Presentation: "Publisher-grade LilyPond" in Ottawa

[Boris Shingarov]

On 06/09/2010 10:52 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> Uh, am I by now in everybody's killfile

I do not know why you keep saying these things, but to avoid any 
misunderstanding I must publicly state that David is in the top 
half-dozen on *my* list of most respected LilyPond people.

On 06/13/2010 09:22 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
> So if of three examples you give, one is in reference to a posting of
> mine (and I don't agree with the sentiment of it, but that's a different
> issue), and two are of postings of mine, it would appear that all
> Lilypond needs for becoming more developer-friendly would be to get rid
> of me.
>    
David, if what I said made you feel bad, I sincerely apologize.

Let me try to clarify what I meant by those quotes:
Interestingly, if we mentally take away those postings for a moment, all 
we then have left is no other help.  So, those posts are the only real 
attempt at an analysis of the problem and possible solutions.  So 
actually, they were the best constructive answer.  But that's exactly 
the problem I am describing: a major critical-edition project asked for 
a couple of features, offering non-trivial rewards for them, and the 
best answer was a (very good) technical analysis concluding with an 
explanation why these features are unworkable.  The request, with the 
bounty offered, did not even make it into the bug-tracker.

Neil Puttock<address@hidden>  writes:

> > "Your post is absolutely unnecessary"
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/address@hidden/msg52334.html
> >      
> That comment wasn't directed at Jiříi; it was part of a reply to David
> Kastrup.
>    

I put that link to Jiri's reply, instead of to the original Nicolas' 
post, for a reason.
The post has created the impression for the end-user (willing to pay for 
development) that it was directed at him; this is proven by the reply.

> But if you actually look at the _original_ postings from which those
> quotes from me were pulled, you'll notice that the quotes have been
> rather carefully pruned in order to construct something unconstructive
> that has not been there in the original posting.
>    

The message I tried to construct, is this: the user's requests did not 
result in solutions which would help the publication of the book.  The 
user was even under the impression that he was told that his posts were 
completely unnecessary.  Even though your original postings do contain a 
rather excellent technical analysis of many sides of the problem.

If you think this message is "unconstructive" and do not agree with the 
original postings, tell me how.

On 06/13/2010 10:55 AM, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> Where are the thousands of Euros bounties for the LaTeX-based solution?  I'm
> not aware of *any* thousands of Euros bounties for anything on LilyPond.
> This is a serious question, not a rhetorical question, by the way.  I have
> looked at the issues with Bounty tags, and the only one I can find that
> seems to be relevant to this discussion is "support for footnotes and/or
> endnotes".  That issue makes no mention of a LaTeX-based solution.
>    
On the mailing list, and when that didn't help, even around a bunch of 
music-related forums.  There were several requests with such bounties.  
As you just mentioned, none of them even got into the tracker.

Boris