On 20/03/2011, at 7:55 PM, Francisco Vila <paconet....@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2011/3/18 Francisco Vila <paconet....@gmail.com>: >> 2011/3/18 Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca>: >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2011 at 09:17:47AM +0100, Marc Hohl wrote: >>>> Just adding articulate.ly in ly/ and giving one example in the docs >>>> is probably not what you expect ... >>> >>> Why not? That's certainly how I'd start going about this. I >>> haven't looked at it, so I might notice some problem with that >>> approach when I see a patch. Or other people might notice some >>> problem with the approach. But that's definitely how to begin. >> >> The attached patch includes and documents the Articulate script. > > I've not checked, but is the license compatible with that of lilypond? > A simple line stating "this file has the same license as the lilypond > package" would serve. It's released under GPL version 2.0 Its copyright is held by myself and by my employer, NICTA, who reserve the right to release it under other licences at other times, and who wish the notice of copyright in the file to be retained. I also assert my moral right to be identified as the original author of the code, Ultimately I expect all this not to be an issue, as the articulate script is really a hack. Its functionality should really be part of the Performer context. And I'm hoping that now that attention has been focussed more on good MIDI output, someone will start hacking on that code to make the articulate script obsolete. Peter C > _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
