Re: Organize collection of scores

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno sab 5 nov 2016 alle 11:31, Noeck  ha 
scritto:

Hi Federico,

thanks for your reply. I also looked at Mutopia and I have to revise
things: My currently planned approach is now B and A would be an
alternative.

Am 05.11.2016 um 10:43 schrieb Federico Bruni:

 Il giorno sab 5 nov 2016 alle 0:55, Noeck  ha
 scritto:

 A) *folders per compilation step and file type*
 ... The disadvantage is that it would
 probably be impossible to produce the output with a simple 
lilypond call

 but only the scripts would be able to engrave the score.


 This is a serious disadvantage.


Well, it probably could still be typed by hand but it would be a long
command with a lot of optional settings.

 What are the LilyPond or Frescobaldi limitations/missing features 
for

 this approach to be possible?


-o can specify the output file or folder. I don't know if it exists 
for

midi files separately.


Actually, I was hoping that it was possible to set the output directory 
*within the input file*, not in the command line. Something like:


#(ly:set-option 'output "mydirectory")



 The audio files would still have to be generated by a script.. Or 
do you

 use the audio export of Frescobaldi?


Yes, that would be an extra script in any case.


 B) *folders per score*



 This is what I use and I think it's the best approach.
 If I want to find a specific file type (PDF or MIDI) I use a file
 manager or a documents manager (like Gnome Documents).


My concern was more about clean folders: The ly files contain the
information in a condensed form (in terms of file format simplicity 
and

file size). The pdfs and audio files are reproducible. In variant A, I
could delete the pdf and audio folders and start from scratch, I could
see by the folder sizes how large the music information is (ly) and 
how

large the derived files.

But scripts that tell me these sizes are easy to write and in git I 
can

ignore file types, so the folder separation is not necessary.



I agree


___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Organize collection of scores

[Noeck]

Hi Federico,

thanks for your reply. I also looked at Mutopia and I have to revise
things: My currently planned approach is now B and A would be an
alternative.

Am 05.11.2016 um 10:43 schrieb Federico Bruni:
> Il giorno sab 5 nov 2016 alle 0:55, Noeck  ha
> scritto:
>> A) *folders per compilation step and file type*
>> ... The disadvantage is that it would
>> probably be impossible to produce the output with a simple lilypond call
>> but only the scripts would be able to engrave the score.
> 
> This is a serious disadvantage.

Well, it probably could still be typed by hand but it would be a long
command with a lot of optional settings.

> What are the LilyPond or Frescobaldi limitations/missing features for
> this approach to be possible?

-o can specify the output file or folder. I don't know if it exists for
midi files separately.

> The audio files would still have to be generated by a script.. Or do you
> use the audio export of Frescobaldi?

Yes, that would be an extra script in any case.

>> B) *folders per score*

> This is what I use and I think it's the best approach.
> If I want to find a specific file type (PDF or MIDI) I use a file
> manager or a documents manager (like Gnome Documents).

My concern was more about clean folders: The ly files contain the
information in a condensed form (in terms of file format simplicity and
file size). The pdfs and audio files are reproducible. In variant A, I
could delete the pdf and audio folders and start from scratch, I could
see by the folder sizes how large the music information is (ly) and how
large the derived files.

But scripts that tell me these sizes are easy to write and in git I can
ignore file types, so the folder separation is not necessary.

Cheers,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Re: Organize collection of scores

[Federico Bruni]

Il giorno sab 5 nov 2016 alle 0:55, Noeck  ha 
scritto:

A) *folders per compilation step and file type*
My currently planned approach would be to have a folder for each type,
like libraries, scores, pdfs, etc. and then some shell scripts to
produce the output of a particular score or all of them and place the
result into the appropriate folders. The disadvantage is that it would
probably be impossible to produce the output with a simple lilypond 
call

but only the scripts would be able to engrave the score.


This is a serious disadvantage.

What are the LilyPond or Frescobaldi limitations/missing features for 
this approach to be possible?

You can already include the libraries in a file.
What you are missing is the possibility of defining a certain output 
directory for each output file (PDF, MIDI) of each score. Right?
The audio files would still have to be generated by a script.. Or do 
you use the audio export of Frescobaldi?


I don't remember if you can set the output directory in a LilyPond file 
(possibly one for each output file type).

This issue is about MIDI file naming:
https://sourceforge.net/p/testlilyissues/issues/3154/


B) *folders per score*
The alternative would be to keep pdf, midi etc. right next to the 
input
files. An additional management script could produce all scores at 
once

and could sum up the required space on disk, etc. But each score would
be compilable within its own directory and without special tricks -
perhaps an include path to a library.


This is what I use and I think it's the best approach.
If I want to find a specific file type (PDF or MIDI) I use a file 
manager or a documents manager (like Gnome Documents).



___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user

Organize collection of scores

[Noeck]

Hi,

I want to reorganize all my scores written with LilyPond in a sensible
manner. There must be people on this list with enormous experience in
doing so. Could you help me?

What I have:
* ly music files
* libraries, both external (openlilylib) and private
* scripts to produce the output (will probably be rewritten now)
* pdf outputs
* midi outputs
* audio outputs (wave, flac, mp3, opus)

More explanation on ly music files:
score files per 'project', some of them come with included files, but
most are in one single file per score. Most .ly files produce 1 pdf, but
some produce multiple pdfs (all voices and single voices, etc) and some
produce multiple midi files (one common and then each voice separately
and the others in the background).

A) *folders per compilation step and file type*
My currently planned approach would be to have a folder for each type,
like libraries, scores, pdfs, etc. and then some shell scripts to
produce the output of a particular score or all of them and place the
result into the appropriate folders. The disadvantage is that it would
probably be impossible to produce the output with a simple lilypond call
but only the scripts would be able to engrave the score.

B) *folders per score*
The alternative would be to keep pdf, midi etc. right next to the input
files. An additional management script could produce all scores at once
and could sum up the required space on disk, etc. But each score would
be compilable within its own directory and without special tricks -
perhaps an include path to a library.

I know this is very opinion based but perhaps there are some experiences
with either approach or something completely different, that I could
profit from.

TIA,
Joram

___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user