Re: Evolutionary User Strategery

[Nicolas Sceaux]

Kieren MacMillan <address@hidden> writes:

> Hi, Bruce:
>> Users dealing with LilyPond as it evolves are presented with
>> difficult choices, none good.
> Well, "none good" might be a bit harsh...  ;-)
> But your point is well taken.
>> If you can identify a better way, or have other comments, please
>> respond.
> Always keep your note code (i.e., content) separate from your score
> and tweak code (i.e., presentation) -- basic note code syntax has
> been (IMO) fairly stable over the last several versions, with the
> chord/simultaneous-music swap (i.e., <> swapped with <<>>) being the
> last major one I can remember.
>
> I have experienced acceptably smooth migrations since about v2.1;
> when things got rough(er) it was almost always because I hadn't
> abstracted my code sufficiently.

Hi Kieren,

You're wasting your time, Bruce has been told what you're explaining
(the data vs layout stuff) several times, but keeps on complaining:
according to him, syntax changes are never justified, and he should not
be the one making an effort when changing LilyPond version; Han-Wen
should, by providing ten year backward compatibility. Freely.

nicolas