On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 09:02:48PM +0200, Valentin Villenave wrote: > On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 6:49 PM, Jonathan Wilkes <jancs...@yahoo.com> wrote: > > I'm interested to know how successful your sales pitch has been. I did a > > free software talk a few weeks ago but talked mostly about Pure Data and > > Ardour, plus music-oriented distros of GNU/Linux. > > I suspect that it may be (ever so slightly!) easier than "selling" > LilyPond, since graphical applications have a little more "bling" than > austere text-oriented apps like LilyPond. > > (Oh, you were referring to Pure Data. Ok, never mind.)
Zing! That was a cheap shot. > > If your audience cringes at \include "italiano.ly", what do they do when > > they learn how to put "ca." in front of a metronome marking, or change the > > direction of a tie after a line break? > > ? I have no idea what you're referring to. Is that something you need > to do with Finale? (If so, it may give me a nice argument when people > object that LilyPond is too complex :-) He means "if your audience is so text-hostile that they can't understand \include, then there's no bloody way that they can write scheme code and overrides, so they won't like lilypond anyway". Cheers, - Graham _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
