Re: 3.0?

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 12:07:07PM +0100, Urs Liska wrote:
> But it would probably make it more attractive for the consumer
> market if it had a nice default GUI. I personally would be pleased
> to see Frescobaldi become such a default GUI (of course not cutting
> out other options). Particularly given the prospect of Frescobaldi
> providing graphical editing capabilities soon (and provided we'll
> get the Mac OSX installation sorted out).
> 
> Would such a step be _conceptually_ acceptable or should LilyPond
> remain "GUI-agnostic"?

I don't think that such a step would be conceptually acceptable
(we could always provide a "stripped down" binary package without
the editor).  However, cross-compiling and distributing
Frescobaldi would be a huge undertaking.

- Graham