Re: Frescobaldi?

[Hajo Baess]

Would it maybe make things a bit easier to leave the whole MacOS
business aside and take care of the Linux-specific stuff first? And
what actually about Windows - out of curiosity. I myself am a Linux
user (Mint), and so far Frescobaldi is still running flawlessly.

And - another question out of curiosity: Could it be a workaround (if
Qt5 would be officially retired and no longer be available in the repos
of the "big" distros like Mint, Ubuntu and the like) if one used a
distro for older computers which might stick to Qt5 much longer?

At any rate the present state of affairs is really sad, since
Frescobaldi just is a masterpiece of software for its purpose. I have
looked at a couple of alternatives, but I was less convinced of them.

Maybe in case Frescobaldi one day will not run any more, I need to
return to a combination of a good text editor and a PDF viewer like I
had many years ago when I was still a Mac user. I had TeXShop and Skim,
and that worked well enough. And then I also sometimes used
LilyPondTool which in the meantime is defunct as well, but was a
similar approach to editing LilyPond files as Frescobaldi.

This is the moment when I wish I'd be a programmer, but I am afraid the
learning curve for helping out with Frescobaldi would be way to steep
for me...

Am Sonntag, dem 28.04.2024 um 22:14 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra:
> > […]
> > Well, the explanation wasn't that brief. Sorry that I didn't have
> > time to write a shorter one, as they say.
> 
> 
> PS: Maybe I should mention that at the time I went down the rabbit
> hole of Python packaging in general because of Frescobaldi, I wrote
> two articles on the LinuxFR site, which may be of interest here if
> one reads French:
> 
> https://linuxfr.org/news/l-installation-et-la-distribution-de-paquets-python-1-4
> https://linuxfr.org/news/l-installation-et-la-distribution-de-paquets-python-2-4
> 
> (Yes, these are ~8 and ~14 pages long. Yes, they're only the two
> first articles in a series of four. I haven't given up on publishing
> the two others, but it's not my priority at the moment.)
>