On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Urs Liska li...@ursliska.de wrote:
Hi Janek,
better don't talk too much about these things.
ok.
I got too excited - sorry.
Janek
___
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 6:34 PM, Jeff Barnes jbarnesweb
If the use of the fonts were covered by LilyPond's license, that would pretty
much
kill using LilyPond for anything at a publishing house, wouldn't it?
There's something called font exception which says that having
LilyPond's font in the
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 2:07 AM, Thomas Morley
thomasmorle...@googlemail.com wrote:
This is a long discussion. We had similar ones in the past. That's useless.
I followed the development of 2.15. in every detail, that I understood
and I want to say that due to David's engagement and skill-ranks
Hi Janek,
better don't talk too much about these things.
They give me an attention I don't deserve yet.
OK, I have plans to 'tweak' several projects to be explicit promotion
for LilyPond.
OK, I'm determined to do some heavy lobbying in an area that _could_
result in a significant boost of
Am 2012-05-25 um 02:07 schrieb Thomas Morley:
This is a long discussion. We had similar ones in the past. That's
useless.
I followed the development of 2.15. in every detail, that I understood
and I want to say that due to David's engagement and skill-ranks
LilyPond has improved in a way
David Kastrup wrote:
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
I don't think that's necessarily applicable to Lily. The end
product
being distributed is paper (or perhaps a pdf file). I don't think the
GPL extends to that, does it?
Of course copyright extends to paper, but not to
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
David Kastrup wrote:
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
But most forward thinking publishing companies
Forward thinking? Are we talking about the music publishing industry?
would give the source code back. After all, their core business
David Kastrup schrieb:
The talk in Chemnitz was disturbing in that respect. I was rather
straight about the need to finance my further contribution to LilyPond,
and there was no shortage of listeners coming to me after the talk,
letting some LilyPond problem getting solved by me (so it was
David Kastrup schrieb:
The talk in Chemnitz was disturbing in that respect. I was rather
straight about the need to finance my further contribution to LilyPond,
and there was no shortage of listeners coming to me after the talk,
letting some LilyPond problem getting solved by me (so it was
David Kastrup d...@gnu.org writes:
For those who are interested in my talk about LilyPond at the recent
event in Chemnitz, the slides are at
URL:http://chemnitzer.linux-tage.de/2012/vortraege/900.
Since my talks tend to do more than just reading off the slides, the
impression may be rather
Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se writes:
tor 2012-05-24 klockan 11:28 +0200 skrev David Kastrup:
I mention funding problems for my work at the end of the talk. It turns
out that this month has dropped so far in one-time monetary
contributions compared to the rather slow uptake of regular
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se writes:
When donating, is there any mechanism in place by which funds will be
donated only if some target level is reached by all donations
together? I'm speculating people might be more comfortable
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 1:17 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se writes:
When donating, is there any mechanism in place by which funds will be
donated only if some target level is reached by all donations
together?
Some messages seem to drop out and never reach me, but I understand the
following was written by David Kastrup:
You propose a system with a guarantee that I will not get any payment at
all unless a minimum is met, meaning that I have to finance the whole
month on my own. This is not exactly
Hi Jonas,
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se wrote:
Some messages seem to drop out and never reach me, but I understand the
following was written by David Kastrup:
You propose a system with a guarantee that I will not get any payment at
all unless a minimum is met,
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:00 PM, Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com wrote:
Wouldn't your time be more wisely spent trying to get corporate sponsors?
I see a lot more success stories in the open source world where a corporation
donates developers to projects the company have an interest in.
As
Janek Warchoł wrote:
Unfortunately, that's not going to happen soon. Even small, local
publishers (i've asked some not long ago) are not interested in
anything else than Finale/Sibelius. I predict that it will take 3-5
years before any major publisher begins using LilyPond, let alone
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 8:23 PM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote:
Janek Warchoł wrote:
Unfortunately, that's not going to happen soon. Even small, local
publishers (i've asked some not long ago) are not interested in
anything else than Finale/Sibelius. I predict that it will take 3-5
years
regards,
Jeff
- Original Message -
From: David Kastrup d...@gnu.org
To: Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com
Cc: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 12:53 PM
Subject: Re: Video recording of LilyPond talk at Chemnitz
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes
Let me first tell you that a _separate_ and unannounced mail copy of
something _also_ sent to a mailing list is considered quite rude since
it more often than not forces the recipient to answer the same mail
twice.
I'll not repeat the points I made in private communication, but for the
sake of
Jonas Olson jol...@kth.se writes:
Some messages seem to drop out and never reach me, but I understand the
following was written by David Kastrup:
You propose a system with a guarantee that I will not get any payment at
all unless a minimum is met, meaning that I have to finance the whole
Tim Roberts t...@probo.com writes:
Janek Warchoł wrote:
Unfortunately, that's not going to happen soon. Even small, local
publishers (i've asked some not long ago) are not interested in
anything else than Finale/Sibelius. I predict that it will take 3-5
years before any major publisher
Let me first tell you that a _separate_ and unannounced mail copy of
something _also_ sent to a mailing list is considered quite rude since
it more often than not forces the recipient to answer the same mail
twice.
Point taken. Won't happen again.
Please read
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
Let me first tell you that a _separate_ and unannounced mail copy of
something _also_ sent to a mailing list is considered quite rude since
it more often than not forces the recipient to answer the same mail
twice.
Point taken. Won't happen again.
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:37 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
Just curious. If there wasn't a free as in beer version of a GPL
software package, wouldn't one logically expect a fork? How does GNU
address that?
You can't fork what has not been
Janek Warchoł janek.lilyp...@gmail.com writes:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 9:37 PM, David Kastrup d...@gnu.org wrote:
Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com writes:
Just curious. If there wasn't a free as in beer version of a GPL
software package, wouldn't one logically expect a fork? How does GNU
I suppose the situation might be as follows: source code is freely
available (on website, github or whatever), but the binaries are not.
Anyone tech-savvy enough to serve himself doesn't have to pay, but
simple users do have. I think that if the price was low (say, 5$)
nobody might be
On 2012-05-24, at 12:56 PM, Jeff Barnes jbarnes...@yahoo.com wrote:
And actually, releasing source for free but binaries for fee makes
some sense.
Agreed. Especially on platforms where build environments aren't free
But if I had to pay to update from 2.14 to 2.16, I just wouldn't,
On May 24, 2012, at 1:46 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
Let me first tell you that a _separate_ and unannounced mail copy of
something _also_ sent to a mailing list is considered quite rude since
it more often than not forces the recipient to answer the same mail
twice.
This in unfortunately more
On May 24, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Jeff Barnes wrote:
Wouldn't your time be more wisely spent trying to get corporate sponsors? I
see a lot more success stories in the open source world where a corporation
donates developers to projects the company have an interest in.
Hmm. OpenOffice for
Tim McNamara wrote;
On May 24, 2012, at 1:00 PM, Jeff Barnes wrote:
Wouldn't your time be more wisely spent trying to get corporate sponsors? I
see a lot more success stories in the open source world where a corporation
donates developers to projects the company have an interest in.
This is a long discussion. We had similar ones in the past. That's useless.
I followed the development of 2.15. in every detail, that I understood
and I want to say that due to David's engagement and skill-ranks
LilyPond has improved in a way that I hardly can believe.
If David isn't payed for
Mogens Lemvig Hansen mog...@kayju.com writes:
Just some thoughts, sadly no solution. Why don't we find some
billionaire who can just hire David to do what David does best?
You'll find that billionaires tend to be a bit hard to approach since
there are millions of people with ideas that they
33 matches
Mail list logo
