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 _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
