Talk:LilyPond

message: This inserted objection is nonsense. Lilypond is a programming language for graphics generation - the graphics of musical notation. All significant programming language articles in Wikipedia that I've ever seen (and I looked at number of them) have coding examples and often output examples. These examples portray the FACTS of language syntax, ease of use, applications for which it's appropriate, and so. Remove these coding examples and essential - I repeat, ""essential"" - information about the language simply disappears. One can talk about it, or show it. Showing is more powerful. Doing both is even more powerful, of course, and good articles do just that.
I strongly object to the notion that this article needs to be "improved" by excising the coding example. It is just an example. It certainly doesn't teach much, and only the naive would think it does. 
This is a good article. Leave it be.
Tomcloyd (talk) 01:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Objection to ''Sample .ly file'' section - it doesn't make sense

message: Hi,
I take issue with
:While it has achieved this, the quality of output from competing commercial packages has improved since the inception of the LilyPond project so that they are now comparable
because it implies that LilyPond can be considered "done" from a typographical POV (which it isn't, IMO). Furthermore, "comparable" is a vague statement: mosquitos and elephants are comparable, and the result of the comparison is that the elefant is bigger. Esthetics aren't well defined, but most printout of Finale and Sibelius still (we're speaking 2006) looks made with a computer.
I think I am not the right person to edit the page itself, though.
Han-Wen (LilyPond Author).
: Han-Wen, thank you for stopping by Wikipedia and providing your feedback.  You may be correct that the comment is unwarranted, though I think you'll agree that Sibelius and Finale have both come a long way, typographically, since their state at the time that you made the first public releases of Lilypond, both in terms of the overall use of white space and in the ability to make tweaks.  I've read through your essay on the "Miss Manners" of music typesetting, and do understand the issues involved.  Do you have some sample scores showing the same musical content printed with Sibelius, Finale, and Lilypond that would highlight some of these differences?  Best regards The Uninvited Co., Inc. 21:50, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Esthetic judgment? 

message: You note three free GUI programs that can export sheet music to LilyPond format; however, they are for Linux only.  Should the fact be noted that no such programs exist for Windows or even for the Macintosh?  Denelson83  06:39, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Of the three, Denemo will work with Macintosh OS X and, indeed, like LilyPond comes with Fink.  However, its state of development at present does not leave something to be desired, but instead is absolutely rotten- Not Ready For Prime Time. Unless much has been improved with 0.7.1-11, the .ly files it produces don't contain a version number, crashes are regular experiences... better to just learn how to use LilyPond or for someone to write a proper GUI and adapt it for XDarwin, this still needs to be done after all. Schissel-nonLop! 03:56, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The free software community is sometimes hostile towards commercial operationg systems, but many programs are offered in a Windows or Macintosh version. I'm one of those with friends in both camps: sort of like Bilbo between the dwarves and the elves. --Uncle Ed 16:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

text: That's true. I've updated the page. Feel free to make these edits yourself! Pnorcks (talk) 01:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  GUI's 

message: Hi there, can someone please add a few lines about the relationship with TeX/LaTeX? It's pretty clear that the notation is at the very least heavily influenced by TeX, but is there more? From a user perspective, is there a (La)TeX lilypond package for integrating music scores into regular TeX documents? From an architectural perspective, is there any reuse going on? (I would expect Lilypond did not reinvent the TeX-parsing wheel.) Thanks. 205.228.118.62 (talk) 05:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: LilyPond was definitely influenced by TeX and LaTeX, and the default output backend used to be TeX, but for the past six years or so, PostScript has been the primary output medium.  In its early stages, IIRC, LilyPond was a preprocessor for MusicTeX. Pnorcks (talk) 21:51, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Relationship to TeX please

message: Should a peice of example code really contain encoding information for one particular editor? Does that line have any meaning to lillypond or can it simply be removed? 130.88.108.187 (talk) 12:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: No, it doesn't have any meaning aside from (maybe) triggering custom syntax highlighting in emacs.  Go ahead and remove it.  There are plans of eventually translating the Spanish GNU LilyPond page to English, so this example might be gone in the future anyway. Pnorcks (talk) 21:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

text: I've removed this line. Pnorcks (talk) 22:10, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  emacs 

message: This article is entitled "GNU LilyPond."  But the software package itself is just "LilyPond."  See , , , etc.  I propose moving it to LilyPond, replacing the redirect that is there, and redirecting :GNU LilyPond to it (due to the many internal and potential external links) to it.  Objections? TJRC (talk) 00:17, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: LilyPond is GNU software, so that's why you occasionally see references to "GNU LilyPond."  I am okay with changing it though, because most people leave off the GNU prefix.  Would we have to move the transcluded pages too?  (i.e. Template:Latest stable software release/GNU LilyPond and Template:Latest preview software release/GNU LilyPond) Pnorcks (talk) 17:42, 23 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Why "GNU"?; Proposed move 

message: the templates for the release don't have the right number of days/months. i don't see how to correct that 71.237.23.168 (talk) 01:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Are you referring to the counters that display the number of days/months since the last releases?  We don't have control over those numbers.  They are always correct right after page modification, but the counters never seem to update on a regular basis; sometimes it happens after a few days, but it looks like the preview release counter hasn't updated in about 9 days, which is unusually long... Pnorcks (talk) 04:34, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  templates have bad date math 

message: I propose to add at the end of this chapter: Therefore, numerous programms deliver lilypond output to be processed by lilypond, and can be used as graphical interface. Pipecat (talk) 23:14, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chapter Design 

message: It would be good to have an example of Hello World simplicity.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deluno (talk • contribs) 03:09, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: How about :commons:File:Aura Lea excerpt.png? --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 03:20, 18 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Simpler example needed 

message: I see this is up for GAN.  It'll run into problems there, though, as it's missing citations for a lot of statements—even whole paragraphs.  There seem to be a lot of sources out there you might be able to use: "LilyPond scores beautiful music" at opensource.com, for instance, as well as in other languages (This one in German).  The LilyPond website also links to a bunch of reviews. Curly Turkey 🍁 ¡gobble! 04:41, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  lack of citations 

message: , what you've done to this example is not an improvement.  The whole point of mediawiki supporting lilypond is that people don't need to know much about the lilypond language to display a simple melody on a page.  The original Solfeggio example is much more appropriate here than the incomprehensible mess you have created.  Also, WP is not a manual.  Here is not the place to be showing off every feature that lilypond provides.  Tayste (edits) 17:57, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Integration into MediaWiki example 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LilyPond. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added  tag to http://lilypond.org/doc/v2.18/Documentation/user/lilypond-learning/Preface
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120723124857/http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/ to http://lilypond.org/web/about/automated-engraving/
*Added  tag to http://lilypond.org/web/images/xivcim.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified