OLL is something that I have occasionally looked into, and something that I am reassured to know is there: it is something that I hoped to use more in the future. I do use notation-fonts. I have not used ScholarLy, Edition-engraver and Analysis so far on occasions when, in hindsight, it would have been useful simply because of the sketchy documentation. That is, I found it quicker to use LaTex and graphics to get the job done. I doubt I’m the only one.
The thought of OLL disappearing does sadden me going forward. I am not a scheme/C programmer but I would be happy to help by fully and finally getting to grips with OLL and working on use-cases or documentation. Damian > On 10 Oct 2020, at 14:40, Andrew Bernard <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello All, > > Since Urs has stepped down from OLL work for personal reasons, as > somebody who has written code for OLL, and contributed some snippets > of some utility, I have been considering taking it all over. I have > proposed to make a new domain openlilylib.space, move to Gitlab. > establish a website on my personal Linux servers at my own expense, > and add much more documentation and morenad try to communicate the use > and utility of OLL to end users. > > I have written to a few of the members of the list and perhaps it is > too soon but I have only heard back from one person. There have been > no contributions for some time. And now suddenly the thread about > licencing has risen again, a topic which I find absurd and I would > refuse to countenance it for any OLL work ongoing that I would be > doing. It seems that thread is trying to actively discourage OLL use. > > Like Urs, I get the impression that the effort on OLL is not worth the > return, as hardly anybody seems to use it and there appears to be > little interest. This is very disappointing. So, may I ask - it is > worth me continuing the development and maintenance of OLL? > > Andrew > > [I am not prepared to discuss changes to GPL and anything related to > licences.] >
