Janek Warchoł <janek.lilyp...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 10:06 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: >> [snip snip] >> Ok, here is the deal: I promise to give real thought about a way to >> _define_ repeat structures in such a straightforward manner that a user >> would understand how to create repeat structures of his own including >> working Midi and \expandRepeats as long as he can hack together the >> glyphs for the _looks_. >> >> And you promise think about how the barline definition interface might >> be made more friendly when in-line recipe and call string are not forced >> to be the same, and how more complex recipes might benefit from not >> being string-only. > > Sounds like a good candidate for consensus. I like this direction, > and i'll gladly help with reviewing specific user interfaces.
What's not to like about others doing the work? More seriously, this is not a candidate for consensus but rather a deal offer for Marc. The price he has to pay is an open mind and likely additional work, and the return offer is code/functionality that will likely fulfill one of his needs. Whether either result will be met with consensus and/or be fully satisfactory to the other or the list members is an entirely different question. And, apart from the additional one-time work, each of us should consider his own work satisfactory and not just swallow a toad for the sake of getting the deal through. I think we can get there. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
