Re: Directed \tweak commands in 2.15.39

[Janek Warchoł]

On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 12:39 AM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 3:10 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> Instead, it would make more sense if people opted to take care of
>>> something like a chapter at a time, or the relation between two
>>> chapters, and brought them into line.
>>
>> Good point.  However, bearing in mind that GLISS may change (a lot
>> of?) things, i think it makes more sense to do it first.
>
> Presuming that "it" == "GLISS", I totally disagree.

Sorry for being imprecise.  I meant "it makes more sense to do GLISS first".

> I am currently
> redoing the footnote docs.  I have spent now about three times the time
> on ordering material in a good manner and writing understandable prose
> in the "proper style" than I changed actually changing things.  Now
> guess someone came and changed the syntax to something different while
> keeping the functionality the same.  Expected effort to adapt to it: 5
> minutes.  Less than the time gained for the project by a few potential
> contributors _not_ deciding to give up on LilyPond for good as being too
> hard for them because of its existing docs.
>
> Writing good docs is lots of hard work.  Adapting it to a new input
> syntax, in contrast, dead easy.  Most of the work will likely even be
> done by convert-ly.

As long as GLISS changes only the /naming/ of the
commands/properties/etc., you are completely right.  However, i'd like
to discuss some more fundamental changes during GLISS; i'm thinking
about GLISS a lot and i have a quite strong feeling that there are
some big changes that would really benefit LilyPond.  And they would
probably quite noticeably change the way in which users write lily
code.

cheers,
Janek