Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub

[Janek Warchoł]

2013/9/17 David Kastrup <address@hidden>:
> And yet [Linus] wrote Linux instead of using the best available tool for the
> job: he already had a copy of Minix, interactive UNIX was quite
> affordable, and other cheap versions came around.

I'm not sure, but from what i've read it seems that Linus initially
wrote Linux more as a hobby - the kernel wasn't a means toward some
goal, but the goal. Besides, there were other reasons why he didn't
use Minix and FreeBSD
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux#Events_leading_to_creation)
Anyway, this is not the point of this discussion.

>> It would be great if the best tool was Free Software, but if it's not,
>> move on.
>
> That's not what Free Software is about.  And it is most definitely _not_
> what the GNU project is about of which LilyPond is part.
>
> You are, of course, free to use proprietary technology to any degree you
> personally like, but your personal indifference towards Free Software

Please don't say so, it's not true.  I'm not indifferent towards Free
Software!  I believe that Free Software *is* the right way to create
software, and that all software *should* be Free.  And i'm doing what
i can to advance Free Software cause.  Saying that i'm indifferent
toward Free software makes me really sorry.

For every computing task i need to do, i first search for Free
Software that can do it.  I choose non-free software only when
available free software isn't good enough to do the job effectively.
Note that i don't require free software to be better than proprietary
software - it just has to be good enough to get things done without
too much extra effort.  I wish i could do everything with Free
Software, but i cannot afford it time- and resource-wise.

> is
> nothing you are in a position to prescribe for GNU LilyPond.  As a GNU
> project, we have agreed to follow the guidelines for maintaining a GNU
> project, in particular
>
> <URL:https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Ethical-and-Philosophical-Consideration>
>
> This states, among others:
>
>     Please don’t host discussions about your package in a service that
>     requires nonfree software. For instance, Google+ “communities”
>     require running a nonfree JavaScript program to post a message, so
>     they can’t be used in the Free World. To host discussions there
>     would be excluding people who live by free software principles.
>
>     Of course, you can’t order people not to use such services to talk
>     with each other. What you can do is not legitimize them, and use
>     your influence to lead people away from them. For instance, where
>     you say where to have discussions related to the program, don’t list
>     such a place.

I agree that it would be better to use Free Software.  But then, we
use non-free Google tracker.

> This will hold to a much larger degree to actually hosting repositories.

Maybe i'm missing something, but when you're talking to a remote
repository (from your local repository), you can simply use git's own
protocol, which is Free Software?  One uses non-free software when
browsing with the web interface and using some other features.

>> In my opinion Github is the best tool for the job, and i'm going to
>> use it.  I'm not forcing anyone to use it,
>
> You are essentially currently trying to migrate work on the LSR there:
>
>     From: Janek Warchoł <address@hidden>
>     Subject: Re: Problem with hemiola notation
>     To: Thomas Morley <address@hidden>
>     Cc: David Kastrup <address@hidden>, lilypond-user <address@hidden>
>     Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 10:59:10 +0200 (1 day, 31 minutes, 26 seconds ago)
>
>     Hi Harm,
>
>     2013/9/16 Thomas Morley <address@hidden>:
>     > Hi again,
>     >
>     > I now come up with a (hopefully) improved version.
>     > It is a function which takes a dotted(!) note as argument replacing it
>     > with the main note and a dot (instead of a tied note)
>
>     Looks nice!
>
>     > \version "2.16.2"
>     > % Does not work with 2.14.2 !
>     > [...]
>
>     If i understand correctly this cannot be added to LSR, so maybe you
>     could add it here http://github.com/openlilylib/snippets ? (scroll
>     down to see description)
>
>     I believe that it won't take you more that 10-15 minutes to submit the
>     snippet even if you're not familiar with GitHub at all (and of course
>     the next time will probably be under 2 minutes).

What i *am* trying to do is to keep valuable LilyPond code from being
lost and forgotten, as well as to create a place to foster development
of useful LilyPond libraries - even if LSR was up-to-date, not
everything fits there.  I saw the need for a repository like this, i
suggested creating it on the mailing list - there was limited support,
so i did it my own way.  If you care about how it's being done, you
could have created it yourself.  And anyway, the repository can be
moved someplace else.

Nobody's obliged to put their stuff there.  Am i trying to discourage
people from using LSR?  I was careful not to suggest to put snippets
which work with 2.14.2 in "my" repository instead of LSR.  Would it
bother you if i had my private repository with lilypond stuff hosted
somewhere?  I hope not.  Now, i'm not selfish and i want to _share_ my
stuff with other people, to collaborate so we can make LilyPond better
together.  And i'm running into trouble when i try to do this!

Look, I am trying to help and I feel like being accused of treason in
return for my work.  This is very discouraging to say the least.  And
what bothers me the most is that it's probably also discouraging for
other people.  One person already told me something like this.

> This whole thread is under the title "we now have "lilypond"
> organization on GitHub" which means that you are not speaking just for
> yourself but are trying to refocus the LilyPond community to GitHub.

It depends on what you mean by "refocusing".

> And you can't even be interested in discussing how Savannah could be
> made to serve our purposes better.
>
> If one does not even permit oneself to _think_ how Free Software could
> be made to fill places currently served by proprietary software, Free
> Software will go nowhere.  Including LilyPond.

<facepalm>
If i haven't seen your next email, i'd think that you're being
intentionally manipulative.

Really, David, you're not making things better by writing like this.

on to the next email..
Janek

PS and by the way, one of my goals with this whole Github thing was to
help some power users (you know who i'm talking about) become more
familiar with Git.  So that they could get more involved in the
LilyPond development if they wanted to.