Re: Release news, development news, state of the world

[Jan Nieuwenhuizen]

Graham Percival writes:

> It attracted positive attention on lilypond-user.  I never said
> *how* much attention it received.

Right.

> Well, I personally don't care.  If somebody wants to work on
> advertising, or even better, work on things which encourage other
> people to do advertising for us, they're welcome to do so.

Now, that's interesting.  Doing a stable release is *much* work,
you probably know that.  IIUC, a major reason for doing more
of that *much* work, is getting positive attention.

OTOH, when you have created a platform to get a cheap peak in
positive attention (a 2.14 release), you don't care.

> At the moment, the top 3 problems for publicity that I see are:

Okay, now we're getting somewhere.  I would like to add a top
reason

0. we don't really have a clue what LilyPond's priorities should be,
   and where our individual priorities lead us

> 1. no prospect of stable releases due to GUB problems, and nobody
> working on them.

So, there is no active developer who wants stable releases.  Great, no
stable releases, then!

> 2. the old lilypond.org/web/ pages are still up (and probably
> still in google's cache), various links point to those, which
> gives the impression that our project died 3 years ago or
> something.

Great, so either you are wrong/exaggerating here, or there is no active
[web]developer who cares about an appearance of death.

> 3. no lilypond report.  It seems that David and Valentin are
> tackling this one.

Yay!

> 4. no rss feed, no automatic twitter announcements, no google+
> announcements, etc.
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=940
> has been on the books for 2 years; nobody's interested.  Even if I
> was interested in manually submitting announcements to places
> (which I'm not, although I'd be willing do it for stable
> announcements), nobody has touched
> http://code.google.com/p/lilypond/issues/detail?id=1719

Okay, so no-one wants more help or more users, everyone is fine with the
team and user base as it is.

> Looks, this is just like musicxml export.

Possibly, although a developer needs to take that on, advertise it and
be prepared to spend a huge amount of time on bug-reports etc.  That
goes with every new feature: am I doing this for myself, for the
credibility for of the program or to possibly extend the
user/usage-base?

> We collectively have demonstrated that we do not care about publicity.

I'm not sure it's publicity per se.  I don't care about publicity in
itself, I don't think anyone should.  What I always wanted was great
sheet music, available to everyone.  You're not going to get there with
just good publicity, at some point in time someone is going to have to
do some great coding.  The question is if you're going to get there with
coding and bug fixing alone.

Jan

-- 
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar®  http://AvatarAcademy.nl