Robert Keller wrote: > > On Jun 11, 2009, at 5:19 AM, Grammostola Rosea wrote: > >> lasconic wrote: >>> I took some time yesterday night to take a look to improvisor code and >>> estimate the cost of adding musicXML export. Import is indeed more >>> complicated. >>> I downloaded the code of improvisor 3.39. It's the last and only code >>> available. Improvisor inner model is a little bit different than >>> musicXML >>> one. Common practice in musicXML is to don't "time" the chords and >>> put them >>> in the middle of notes. At least, this is my experience with finale >>> musicXML >>> export features. I managed to make a quick and dirty prototype to >>> export a simple melody (no >>> tuplet) and chord root and bass (no extension yet). Chords are in >>> between >>> notes but lily+musicML2ly shoud be able to deal with it. >>> Unfortunately, 3.39 >>> is an old version, and according to Bob Keller the code base changed >>> a lot >>> but it's not public yet. With some more voices, perhaps we can >>> convince Bob Keller and his team to >>> open up the repository to the public. After all, improvisor is a >>> fine piece >>> of software which can benefit from open development, moreover if >>> time and >>> resources are an issue. >>> >>> Lasconic >>> >>> >> Thanks man. I'll forward this to Bob Keller too. >> I think he mentioned in a message that he is willing to give >> developers svn access to the recent code. >> >> Bob, could you comment on this? >> >> Kind regards, >> >> \r >> > > I'll be looking toward moving Impro-Visor to a public repository, as > soon as I stabilize the current version, which I hope will be before > the end of June. Ah that's good news. Thanks.
> Is SourceForge the best bet? > > I think SourceForge is good, but others might think different (I have little experience with it myself, others?) Let us know when it's up there. Kind regards \r _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
