Re: Embed LilyPond source files inside generated PDF (issue 225040043 by address@hidden)

[v . villenave]

On 2016/02/29 11:25:37, dak wrote:
> On 2016/02/29 11:22:32, dak wrote:

> > Oh, didn't see it.  I definitely would refrain from modifying files
in any
> way.

^This, and:

> Besides, the main purpose of adding such files is that the recipient
is able to
> recompile them on his own in the same manner.  If every recompilation
adds
> another crud header to the included files, that will eventually become
annoying.

Yes, absolutely. (Then again, we can be smart about it and refrain from
adding a header whenever we detect an already-existing one.)

However, I’m not sure about that:

> > If the author wants identifying information, he can add it to the
top of the
> > files on her own.  Using this option should always be a conscious
choice, and
> > that includes making the files suitable for exporting.

This is not a discussion we need to have right now, but I’d very much
like for us to consider eventually turning this option on by default
(just like we already do with point-and-click, which needs to be
deliberately disabled by the user to produce a "normal" PDF file).
Granted, this may well add security issues (but we already are producing
potentially unsafe PDF files).

Another option would be to embed an additional README (or NFO :-) text
file, which would only contain a couple of lines explaining what these
files are, why they’re there and how to download LilyPond. That way the
original source code would be left in a pristine state.

Then again, that may well be outside of the scope of this patch.

V.

https://codereview.appspot.com/225040043/