On Sat, 10 Oct 2020 at 15:40, Andrew Bernard <andrew.bern...@gmail.com> 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.] > I also want to add my voice to the ones who do use OLL and would be sad to see it go unmaintained. I use at least parts of it (mainly the edition engraver, break sets and the shapeII function) whenever I work with LilyPond (which is not as often as I would like to and should, but still more or less regularly and as part of my job). Unfortunately, I am currently in no position to contribute to it (regarding both skill and time), although I had always hoped I would be able to some day. -- Peter Crighton | Musician & Music Engraver based in Mainz, Germany http://www.petercrighton.de
